STATE CONTROL.

Auckland Star, Volume LXV, Issue 27, 1 February 1934, Page 8

STATE CONTROL.

COMMODITY PRICES. RECENT EXAMPLE OF PETROL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE DIVIDED. The principle of Government interference in trading and particularly the recent legislation regulating the price of motor spirit was considered at the meeting of the council of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce this morning. Opinion was divided on the virtue of State fixation of prices. The Chamber had under consideration a resolution from the Associated Chambers of Commerce. After protesting against the rushing through of the legislation in the dying hours of Parliament, the resolution strongly objected to the proposals in the Bill which would have the effect of depriving the whole community of the benefits resulting from competition in the sale of petrol, as well as of preventing the possibility of any such beneficial competition "in the future because of the fixation of prices proposed, and that at the direction of one man, the Minister of Industries and Commerce, instead of Parliament. The resolution drew warnin"- attention to the great danger involved in allowing the State to assume the control of private business by fixing the prices of goods, commodities and services.

Previous Similar legislation. Mr J 4 C Allum drew attention to the principle underlying the last portion of the resolution. He was not too sure, he said, that it was not too late to object to that. Similar legislation had been enacted not only in New Zealand but u. Great Britain. He mentioned the Auckland Milk Bill as an instance of legislation which had for its objective the prevention of powerful organisations destroying weaker ones. The underlying motive was that weak traders must be protected against the powerful. While he was not commenting specifically on the bill regulating the price of petrol, he thought that legislation of the kind wa* inevitable. It seemed to be following the trend of public opinion, winch the chamber had to bow to. Mr. Harvey Turner: We can help to mould public opinion. . ■ Mr W R Fee said he believed if the Government'had not taken action when it did something more serious would have happened. Everybody knew that there had been a "war" going on among the importers, of petrol, and that control would again soon have been in the hands of a big,combine. As it was now, the public was .going to pay a fair and reasonable price. Mr H E. Vaile asked whether if it was right in principle to fix the price of benzine, it would not be right to fix the price of any other commodity. "A Grave Mistake."

. ■ The public, said Mr. A. G. liunn, would soon realise that a grave mistake was beuwr made if this type.of legislation were flowed to go on There was provision in the Board of Trade Act to prevent oppressive monopoly. . . . "Whatever the motive, the principle is wrong. It is a further incursion into the field of private enterprise," said Mr. u. Jackson, "If it goes on it will not.be Ion" before the whole chain of private enterprise will be socialised. Any interference with the laws of supply and demand is bound to fail." ' '£ Mr Allum questioned whether tne principle was wrong. He had, lie said, not been able to, make up his- mind whether the socialising of qertarn services was wrong. No organisation should be allowed to destroy the small man. There was a world-wide tendency to bring the small trader back into business. It was not a question of fixing prices, but ot determining what was fair. The Transport Act was an illustration of that. Me asked whether conditions had not reached the point where we must be prepared to see the State interfere. .The position of the farming community was an illustration. Steps, had to be taken to help it in its difficulties. . It was not the T>nnciple,' but the riiethod,—raising the exchange—that was objected to in that case. Was it not significant that the National Government in England was working on these very lines in regard to transport, . milk and agricultural products?

"Laughable Attempt." Mr. Harvey Turner said that the Government action would save a particular company from competition. Only a few years ago there had been an agitation to bring the price of petrol down in New Zealand, and now. there was legislation to put it up again. Hβ would rather see straightout socialisation.. The attempt to interfere in the distribution of primary products would be laughable if it were not tragic. Mr. Allum: You wait and eee what will happen next year. Mr. Turner.added that in the long run the action of the Government would not be of any value. As had been pointed out by Mr. Vaile, certain unscrupulous traders were avoiding it by giving extra measure. '"■-'- Mr. Darlow agreed with Mr. Allum that the resolution should be further considered before the Chamber expressed its official opinion.. It''was decided by vote to defer the matter for further consideration by the executive],