PETROL PRICES.

Auckland Star, Volume LXV, Issue 39, 15 February 1934, Page 8

PETROL PRICES.

STATE INTERFERENCE. COMMERCE CHAMBER VIEWS. NO CONCLUSION REACHED. Government interference In commerce, and the legislation of last session giving the Minister of Industries and Commerce power to regulate the wholesale and retail price of petrol, were the subject of a long discussion at the meeting of the -council of the Chamber of Commerce this morning. Eventually it was i decided to defer a decision ai> to the council's attitude for three months, when further developments, if any, in the motor fuel industry will assist in guiding the council. . At the council's last meeting a resolution was received from the executive of the Associated Chambers deploring that the Motor Spirits (Regulation of Prices) Bill had been rushed through in the dying hours of the session, and protesting that the effects of the bill would be to deprive the whole community of the benefits, resulting from competition in the sale of petrol. Further, the resolution emphasised that it prevented the possibility of beneficial competition in the future, because the Minister of Industries and Commerce was empowered to fix the prices. The council then deferred the endorsement or otherwise of the resolution until to-day.

Function of Parliament. A letter was read this morning from the. chairman of directors of the Associated Motorists' Petrol Company commenting on the council's discussions. "It is generally agreed that the function of Parliament is to protect the weak against the strong in the interests of the community," the letter read. "To-day Associated Motorists' Petrol Company is the only independent company operating in New Zealand, and without the legislation, which some members object to. tins company in a short time would be crushed."' "It is not a question of the Government interfering in business, but protecting a company which is a buffer for the protection of the public against the major oil companies," said Mr. Lowe. Mr. A. A. Ross said he thought this was one of the exceptional cases where Government interference was warranted, to ensure that the public got fair play. Mr. C. F. Bennett stated that the chamber, though it had in 1928 upheld the principle of no-. Government interference in business, had to adapt itself to the changing conditions of the day. For the chamber to condemn legislation which was going to give the public a benefit would be absurd. Air. F. N. Ambler then moved that the matter be left in abeyance for three months to see how the situation worked out. "Difficult Position." Mr. Clinkard stated that the legislation seemed designed to relieve a difficult position, which was likely to become more acute. Motorists in the past had paid more than they should have done. He said that when the Government proposed to increase the tax on petrol by 2d the big companies said that they could not bear a penny of it, but when opposition came they quickly reduced their prices by 6d a gallon. If that legislation had not teen brought in the price of petrol would very quickly have gone [back. America, with its National Recovery Act, provided an instance of State interference in business. He did not think the legislation had been hurried and he thought the chamber would be on wrong grounds if it decided to approve the Associated Chambers' resolution. Mr. Ambler's resolution was then carried. A reply to the associated motorists letter was referred to the executive. "Fair Deal" Wanted. Mr. J. A. C. Alluin said that although he agreed that the Government should not interfere with trade, it was its function to see that the community got a fair deal. If the council were going to stand for the crushing of 6mall traders, he was definitely against it. "Why does the Government interfere with business?" he asked. "Because we, as business men, have not the commercial sense to run our own affairs. The time is overdue for legislation to enable traders to regulate their own affairs. If they do not do it the Government must step in. Are w r e to be parties to prevent a state of affairs where undue cutting of prices is resulting in people going out of business one after the other?"

Mr. Allum added' that there was unfair competition in all classes of trade, which called for a remedy. If it was not done by business men themselves, the Government must interfere. He reiterated that he would not see a state of affairs where the traders were not getting a fair deal.

Mr. H. T. Merritt emphasised that the Minister had recently stated that he did not intend to exercise the powers of the legislation. This appeared to support the contention that the effects of the legislation had not been properly considered. He understood in this case that the crushing of one company did not enter into the matter, as the company had of its own volition set out to compete against the bigger ones. It had always been laid down tiy the chamber, he said, that the Government had a right to interfere in business only when it conformed to the same rules, taxes and regulations that applied to private traders. Mr. Fee said he was concerned with the public interest and he understood that the war in the petrol trade was to start again. Mr. Harvey Turner, president, said the position now was that the Government, after rushing the legislation through, did not intend to do anything.