PRACTICAL PROSPERITY.

Auckland Star, Volume LXV, Issue 153, 30 June 1934, Page 15

PRACTICAL PROSPERITY.

-Albert Kussell and company etato that it' is utter nonsense for .New Zealand to foster her secondary industries, as it would lead to world stagnation. Australia has not' stagnated; in fact, she is now very much , the other way. aiicl is now on the highroad to recovery, owing to fostering her secondary industries and using her own raw materials instead of exporting , it-cheaply and importing it back again in otlior forms, at fancy prices, to benefit others, while her' own citizens starve. England also of liite jrears has turned to protecting her industries by tariff,, and she also is beginning to recover and to lessen her army of unemployed.. What its good enough for Australia and England—iu

fact, all countries—i<3 fcot only good enough, but essential for New Zealand if she is to survive and prosper; in fact, it is only her secondary industries that are keeping things afloat at present, now that primary products have slumped. They state there arc 550;000 workers m New Zealand, with 1,000,000 dependents—two to one, an average of three to each family. Roughly, of fcheae, they claim 15 per cent "are' engaged jn secondary industries; that gives 82,500, which, with their dependents, gives us 232,500 persons depending on our secondary industries for a livelihood. They then divide this 82,500 into three sections, 5 per cent, 0 per -cent and 4 per cent; but these percentages of the above only oj vc 12,:J75 out°of 82,500. The other 85 per cent is not accounted for anywhere. However, taking the inference to mean, roughly, a third in each class, this gives 27,500 workers eliminated, which, with their dependents, would mean 77,500 more people on the bread line, according to their figures—not mine—besides those indirectly affected by this further loss of spending power, and without placing one already , , unemployed into work; and for what benefit to the country as a whole? None. The only benefit would bo to a few importers, as, once' competition was killed by dumping, firme would be as you were. For instance, take nursery shoes for small children. These are not made here, and come in duty free, yet one has to pay as much lor them as for a pair of shoes for a child of nine or ten made here, and they arc only a few shillings in England. " U.M.P.