THE SECONDARY INDUSTRIES.

Press, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20551, 20 May 1932, Page 10

THE SECONDARY INDUSTRIES.

SUBSIDISING SUGGESTED. FARMERS' UNION SUPPORT SCHEME.

A suggestion that the secondary industries in New Zealand, now languishing because of the difficult times, should be subsidised from the Unemployment Fund, was made at the annual conference of the North Canterbury district branch of the New Zealand Farmers' Union held in Christchurch yesterday. Tho remit, carried unanimously, concerning this question was as follows: "That as the primary producers' best customers are the citizens or this Dominion, and as it should be the aim of every State to have its citizens usefully and contentedly employed, and as thousands of our unemployed were employees of our secondary industries, which are now languishing owing to difficult times, this conference urges the unemployment Board to make a searching investigation into tho possibility of assisting those industries by way of subsidy from the "Unemployment Fund, to enable them cither to employ more hands or to market their goods at a lower price in order to quicken consumption. Piece-work Ideal. The president of the conference, Mr Colin Mcintosh, in moving the adoption of the remit, said that since tho re 7 strictions of awards had been removed to a large extent from industry the time was opportune for tho secondary industries to he set going again on a ■wider basis. Tho ideal should be to get back to piece-work so that employers could say that the value of a product was so much and if the workers agreed to produce so as to be able to sell at that price, then tho industry would be set in motion. That was an economic proposition. '*' Wo can manufacture in New Zealand," he continued, "for our own consumption and in such cases where it is possiblo manufacture should be set in train immediately. Even if the price is a little higher it will be cheaper to do so in the long run. To-day work of hardly any value is being carried out by men on the unemployed registers, and surely it would be far better to have them employed in positions where | they would bo satisfied workers in secondary industries. Any labour that simply fills in time to enable pay to bo drawn —relief pay, that is—cannot be taking the best that is in a worker, and is therefore to be deprecated. Subsidising of secondary industries would mean, employment for tradesmen and their production as bolter and more satisfied citizens. It is easy to criticise in these times of stress, but it does seem that this remit "suggests a remedy for tho present crisis in part at least, and without any intention to take up the position of a dictator it is brought forward for serious consideration." Mr R. G. Bishop, of Ellesmere, seconded the remit. He said that the time appeared ripe for development of secondary industries. It was certain that primary production did not provide the one and only avenue for absorbing unemployed and easing the present situation.

Payment for Work Done. Mr H. G. Parrish (Oxford): The tinift is ripe if we can only get back to the standard of work known before the war. There has been far too much done on the principle of half a day's work for a full day's pay. Piece-work can be most successful If a good day's work is rewarded with a full day's pay, and I stress that it is no use bringing back tbe wage standard simply because men on piece-work are able to earn big money by industrious work of a highly skilled type.

Mr K. T. McMillan said that he was not quite in accord with the idea of taking the subsidy from the Unemployment Fund, as any subsidising of a sufficiently large scalo would absorb all the moiujy available and then require more.

Mr L. Watson (Oxford): The Unemploymeut Board allows men to cut gorsc on properties at no cost to the occupiers, and I consider that subsidising. Voices: Hear, hear! Mr Watson: It is, and I do not like it as such. It is detrimental to the morale of both men and employers. We want men employed in pursuits which mean that they are able to get a little ahead and not simply getting food and clothing. Mr James Dunlop (Waimairi); The subsidy on fertilisers laßt year was of great benefit to farmers, and an idea of subsidising might well bo extended to secondary industries. It would show, anyway, that'the Farmers' Union is not' antagonistic to secondary industries. The remit was carried unanimously after it had been pointed out in reply to Mr McMillan that investigation might reveal that the Unemployment Fund would not be tho best source from which to make a subsidy. Th'at was a point that should be left to the investigators to decide.