The Press Friday, November 30, 1928. Secondary Industries.

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 19481, 30 November 1928, Page 8

The Press Friday, November 30, 1928. Secondary Industries.

The address delivered by the, retiring President, Mr A. W. Beaven, at the annual meeting of tiie Canterbury Manufacturers' Association, marks a notable advance from the position formerly taken up by the local manufacturers. Until very recently the various Associations representative of the | secondary industries had no policy f other than the continual raising of the tariff on imported goods. It is encouraging to those of us who realise ihat such a policy could not be beneficial to the nation, or, in the long run, to the secondary industries, which would suffer from any uneconomic dislocation of the nation's industrial structure, that the President of the Canterbury Association takes a broader view of the problem of industrial development. The root difficulty, as he points out, is that the manufacturing industries cannot make use of the benefits of mass-production. The Dominion cannot, as he knows, enjoy the fruits of mass-production such as is possible in countries with populations of 60, or 80, or 120 millions, but it can and ought to make the best of the situation in which it finds itself. The central idea of his address is contained ill the following passage;—

. I still do not believe in high indiscriminating tariffs on all goods coming into our country. We must pay closer attention to obtain tariff increases for those industries which have our natural prqductions to work on—as wool, leather, iron. Choose carefully those items we can expect tp sell the largest number of, concentrate our machinery, talents, capital, energy upon these and then claim full protection on these items, so that those products from other countries are absolutely eliminated, and we can then make these items in such larger numbers that the price of them can be reduced and industry secure its due reward.

Although The Press has been opposed to the policy of indiscriminate tariffraising unbacked by technical improvements in industrial methods, we have always admitted that there are cases in which higher tariff protection could lead to lower prices. We discussed one such case some time ago, and Mr Beaven quoted another—the case of disc harrows and drills. If the local manufacturer could get the whole locjil market, the reduction in " over- " head " per machine would make possible a reduction of price. There are, doubtless, other cases of the same kind. One of tl?e most serious weaknesses in the organisation q£ our secondary industries is the neglect of the value of specialisation and - standardisation. There are several industries in which too many firmware engaged—ranging from the large and efficient to the small and less efficient, There are many factories which, instead of concentrating on one or two or three lines, leaving other factories in the\same industry to concentrate on others, attempt to operate over the whole range of that industry's productions. "To make " more of ft fewer number of articles," the retiring President said, " should be "ouraim; to do this difficulties will "have to be surmounted witji qusto- " mers, 'architects, etc., who like each "to have his own special fancied article and object to standardised " goods, but these can be educated to " think differently.- Other countries /•' have found that successful manufac- " turing is secured only by mass"production" By paying close attention to the principles underlying Mr Beaven's address the local manufacturers can do better for themselves than by seeking salvation through tariffs alone, and it is agreeable to know that they are very likely to do so.