Wairarapa Times-Age TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1939. A POLICY OF TRUE PROGRESS.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 11 July 1939, Page 4

Wairarapa Times-Age TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1939. A POLICY OF TRUE PROGRESS.

the Minister of Industries and Commerce’ (Mr Sullivan) observed the oilier day, there is much to be said in favour of a wide distribution of industries throughout, the Dominion. Apart from the fact that there are centres in New Zealand with available labour but no industry, while industries in other centres are experiencing difficulty in obtaining labour, the undue massing of industries in limited areas is diametrically opposed to national welfare. It is beginning to be realised over a considerable part of the world that the reasonable decentralisation of industry offers an assured means, not only of promoting social welfare, with better living, working and housing conditions than would otherwise be possible, but of building up the general prosperity, strength and efficiency of a nation.

Though they are now well established, and are giving rise to a considerable amount of progressive reorganisation and decentralisation in Britain and other countries of advanced industrial development, these facts are not yet getting in New Zealand anything like the attention they deserve. With its industrial organisation largely to build, and with virtually unlimited supplies of hydro-electric power to be drawn upon, this country has a wonderfully open opportunity of placing and developing industries with the greatest possible advantage to its people. Plainly as that opportunity is defined, however, and in spite of the teaching of experience both in this country and in older lands, the ruling tendency still is to mass industries in and about a few leading centres of population.’ In this matter, as in a good many others, there is a rather common disposition to confuse mere custom and habit with an exercise of practical wisdom and foresight. In the extent to which the position is examined on its merits, the advantages of distributing industries as widely as is reasonably possible will appear* more and more clearly. Districts like the Wairarapa have their own part to play in bringing about a more effective distribution of industries. A good beginning would be made by considering what may be done to add to the attractions and inducements already offered. The Wairarapa, as matters stand, compares reasonably well with any part of New Zealand in offering convenient anti advantageous sites for various kinds of factories and other industrial establishments, which would be served reasonably well by existing transport facilities and will be served better still in that particular when the Rimutaka deviation tunnel has been pierced. Electric power is available throughout a. great part of the district. A good deal may depend on what is done to make these advantages and others fully available. For instance, the Auckland Power Board is at present considering the offer of special concessions to industrialists in the first year of the operation of new undertakings. This is a lead that might be well worth following in the Wairarapa. Methodical efforts should be made to end conditions in which industrial development, in the limited extent to which it is spreading northward from Wellington, is tending to spread chiefly into the Manawatu, to the almost total neglect of at least equally desirable territory on this side of the Tararuas. THE AMERICAN ARMS EMBARGO. YESTERDAY’S report from Washington that thirty-four members of the United States Senate are determined to fight to a finish the attempt to lift the American arms embargo, and that, “a stunning and perhaps a fatal blow” has thus been dealt to President Roosevelt’s attempt to revise the Neutrality Act this session, introduced new matter only in attributing increased strength to the hostile Senate group. It was reported a month ago that thirteen members of the Senate, including some of its shrewdest tacticians, had pledged themselves to an “uncompromising fight against the Administration’s proposal to remove from the Neutrality Law provisions for embargoes against shipments of arms.” Even now it is not suggested that the Senators who oppose the lifting of the embargo will be able to muster a majority. What is suggested is that they will block the Administration’s proposal by skilfully-devised tactics of obstruction. These tactics might prevail even if the group intending Io adopt them were much smaller than it is now declared to be. 11 is also suggested, however, that the Administration and its supporters may counter tactics of obstruction by taking action to repeal the entire Neutrality Act, instead of making another attempt to agree upon a satisfactory amendment. Assuming, as is probable, that the Administration could command a majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, it would no doubt be possible to force an early decision on the simple issue of repeal. The position would then be that it would remain for the United States to shape its policy in light of the actual circumstances of any war that might break out in Europe or elsewhere. That such an adjustment, of policy almost certainly would be carried out in any case rather lessens the interest, that otherwise might be taken in the present conflict bet ween the Administration and Congressional obstructionists over the Neutrality Act and part icularly over the arms embargo. Aoioi'icaii advocates of the repeal of the Neutrality Act hold, however, and perhaps justly, that this action would be a warning 1o potential warniakers. There appears to be a growing acceptance in the United States of the view stated by the “New York 'fimes” and quoted in a cablegram yesterday, that “the best hope of keeping the United States at, peace does not lie in a policy of attempting to isolate us from the consequences of a general war, but in a policy of making the outbreak of war less likely.” Assuming that this is the dominant trend of American opinion the repeal of the Neutrality Act may be greatly preferable to a continuation of the wrangle over the arms embargo. MARKET GARDEN LANDS. (jp)OD reasons were shown by Mr L. Robinson, in a statement which appeared in our news columns yesterday, for taking serious stock of certain Wairarapa lands, particularly parts of the Lower Valley, as market garden areas capable of producing considerable quantities of the vegetables needed in Wellington. The question of utilising these lands has already been raised in the House of Representatives by the member for Wairarapa (Mr Ben Roberts) and there is no doubt that he has an excellent case in hand. The proposal to take the Kukn lands, near Levin, has been dropped by the Government and alternative lands are needed to replace the market garden areas which are to be built over in the Tlutt Valley. It seems clear that the needs thus raised could be met, to the satisfaction of all concerned, in the Wairarapa. If. however, any doubts are entertained on the subject tin* Government’s reasonable course would be to adopt the suggestion made by Mr Robinson and have an expert investigation made of the lands in the Pirinoa district, and elsewhere in the Lower Valley which are declared to be eminently suitable for cultivation as market gardens.