STATE ENTERPRISES

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21086, 10 February 1934, Page 9

STATE ENTERPRISES

TO TTIB EDITOR rp TUB PEE3S Sir,—The remarks of Sir Harold Beauchamp at a meeting of the Wellington Gas Co.'s shareholders about the disabilities under which private enterprise is to-day groaning will be read with either approval or amusement, according to the political ooinions of the reader; but to me they seem strange and somewhat lacking in thought, coming from such a source. Sir Harold must be perfectly aware that to-day we are living—or existing—in a semi-socialistic state and the various government enterprises, all established by capitalistic ministries—are practical illustrations of the fact that we are rapidly heading for that Marxian elysium which has been the dream of its adherents since the "ism" was born. All state or municipal trading is a phase of state socialism. Its object is to place the particular commodity at the service of the people at the cheapest possible rate; in other words, a means of curbing the capacity of that very •'private enterprise" that Sir Harold is so perturbed about. In fact, state enterprise aims at the complete elimination of the private article as a rival in our commercial life. This being so, is it likely that a socialistic state would tax its own industries in order that it would not come into unfair competition with that very private—or capitalistic—concern, the destruction of which is the very reason of its own existence? To adopt such an attitude would be a direct negation of its own basic principles. Sir Harold says, "We can see no adequate reason why state and public body trading should not be.,taxcd, as well as private enterprise." I trust these few lines will enlighten him on the subject. If state industries were taxed so as to bring them into line with private concerns, what would be the benefit to the community of socialism at all?

The recent Tramway Board elections are another phase of socialism that I would like to touch upon. This is a socialistic concern, and as such shouid be controlled by socialists and not, as hitherto, by men who have no sympathy whatever with socialism as a system of government. We have dozens of socialistic enterprises here in Christchurch, all controlled by men who would feel very indignant at being classed as socialists. If their sympathies are net in keeping with the political system under which they are occupying, well-paid positions, they are impudent anomalies and should get out. If we are to have socialism let us have it, not the travesty of the system we have at present.—Yours, etc., D.M.D. February 9, 1934.