INDUSTRIAL COMPETITION OF PRISON LABOUR.

Press, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20620, 9 August 1932, Page 15

INDUSTRIAL COMPETITION OF PRISON LABOUR.

TO THE EDITOR OS 1 THE PRESS. Sir, —It was with exceeding interest and gratification that I read Mr A. F. Wright's forcible statements regarding the competition between the Canterbury quarry and shingle pit industries and the Government prison pits at Paparua. It must be quite evident to all that the local quarries havo a good case against the obviously unfair competition with prison labour, especially when one considers that some of these businesses have been established many years, while the prison pits are of comparatively recent origin and in the first place were only started to procure shingle for use in prison buildings, etc. But now they compete in tho open market with all and sundry, certainly with great detriment to the old-established firms. Of course one realises that work must be fcrnnd for those detained at the prison, but not necessarily that form vf labour which enters into such direct competition with the local taxpayer. "Why not enlarge the farming industries of the prison, on which they have already had such excellent results, to judge by the splendid crops of lucerne, etc., seen on the prison farm. There is plenty | of land available, and the products .resulting from such works are always saleable and, moreover, compete to a certain extent with outside markets, and are not a direct menace to the existence Of a local industry, which is already hard enough hit by the universal depression, and in which there is already any amount of the keenest competition. There are large areas of poor land in the vicinity which, by the use of prison labour, could be permanently improved and be turned eventually into profitable use by the State. I sincerely hope that this direct form of competition with local industry will bo removed. There is already far too much encroachment into industry for the welfare of this Dominion.— Yours, etc., TAXPAYER. August Bth, 1932.