INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21903, 2 October 1936, Page 12

INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

Second Reading Debate on Bill i- - r s , . ; /- v;- . , .

GOVERNMENT TAKES URGENCY -■■■V f ' ■ ,-u , y.. \ ■ ■ ■■ v~. ■■■ •" «.«**•-*:- .■—- •". v . • .m.-' *v- ■" * - Minister Makes Longest Speech of Session *■ - ■ [From Our Parliamentary- Reporter] ’ WELLINGTON, October 1. By asking for urgency for the second reading debate of the Industrial Efficiency Bill in the - House of Representatives to-day, the Prime Minister (the Bt. Hon. M. J. Savage) made sure that ,in their first discussion on. this important measure members would make good Inroads in a task which might prove unexpectedly long. "

The debate was continued until midnight, when the House rose'after the Prime Minister had announced that because of the State 'luncheon to Empire commerce delegates It had been decided not to meet at all bn Friday. Consequently the debate cn the bill will not be resumed uaiil Tuesday. In opening the second reading debate the Minister for Industries’ and Commerce made what must easily be the longest speech of the session in an effort to cover all the Important details of a bill which has an extremely wide scope.

• Other speakers were Mr S.' G. Holland (Christchurch North), who opened the Opposition’attack on the bill, Mr T. H. McCombs (Govt., Lyttelton), Mr W. J. Poison (Nat., Stratford), Mr C. Morgan Williams (Govt., Kaiapoi), and the Hon. Sir Alfred Ransom (Nat., Pahiatua),

! SPONSORSHIP OF MEASURE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY MINISTER “LEGISLATION VITALLY NECESSARY** ' ■ 1 ’ ■ \ * ■ |From Our Parliamentary Reporter.! WELLINGTON, October 1. Various grounds in justification of the proposal:, for the regulation and control of industry outlined in the Industrial Efficiency Bill were stated ’ by the Minister for Industries and Commerce (the Hon. D. G. Sullivan! in moving the second reading of the bill- in the House of Representatives to-day. Mr Sullivan’s speech lasted for two hours and 20 minutes. Legislation of the type contained in the bill, waa vitally necessary, the Minister said. The manner in which several important industries had been allowed to languish or had become over-capitalised was proof that a measure of control was required. A man acknowledged to be a leading figure in the coal industry had informed him that the system of company mining to-day was chaotic, and that a system of licensing was urgently required. The coal industry, in the opinion of many, was lacking in control, organisation, and co-ordination; and it was not the only industry in the-Dominion which had suffered in the same way. The flax industry, which had once been flourishing, was not in a position to-day to meet insistent demands for fibre from other parts of the world, and that was purely the result of lack of control m the past. The principles embodied in the bill, the Minister said, were finding an increasingly wide application throughout the world. Different schemes of co-or-dination, amalgamation, and licensing .were being employed, and in one country, because of over-capitalisation in certain directions, it was stipulated that no new factories should be estab- • lished. Great Britain was dealing with the question piecemeal, industry by industry; but schemes .for the rationali- . sation and control of industry were in operation in the United States and nu- ■ merous European countries. • Mr Sullivan said he had not been disappointed with the reception of the bill. Even the criticism of the newspapers had been somewhat restrained, . and their main request was for more time for consideration of the measure. ,The attitude of the manufacturers generally had been quite fair. Highlyplaced officials of manufacturers’ organisations had taken the view that the bill was desirable,’ and that it should go on the statute book, in the interests of the manufacturing industries. Certainly the manufacturers were noi V' unanimous, and even those who supported the bill might not agree with some of the clauses. However, the bill was definitely wanted by a majority of the- organised manufacturers in New Zealand. The Rt. Hon. J. G. Qoates (Nat., Kaipara): But this bill covers more titan manufacturers. “That is so,” replied the Minister, "but the main point is much wider than that. It is whether the law of free and cut-throat competition—the law of the jungle and the survival of the fittest —is to be the law Of the future," 5 or whether we are to have a law of common sense and civilisation, with organisation on modern lines. “Already several industries in the Dominion have started bn the task of preparing their own efficiency schemes,” Mr Sullivan said. “Some are - well advanced. Suggestions have been made that this legislation may result in a capitalistic monopoly or a system of control by the workers. T admit that with the workers’ aspect we are adopting a method which has not been, adopted elsewhere—we are associating thefn with the preparation of, industrial plans. We envisage co-opera-tion of manufacturers, workers, and consumers for the good of the. industry, under the parentage ahd guidance * of the State. If it is necessary for the State to 'grant tariff protection and subsidies to an industry, surely it is equally justifiable that the State should exercise some supervision over indus- ■ (trial development. • “I admit that the bill is very wide 5n Its scope,” Mr Sullivan added, “but the work has to be approached Sn a careful and discreet manner. We ■ ere not going to.start off to rationalise every industry in the country oversight. We will probably take one industry, which itself has been making requests.for reorganisation, and make e start on that, working in the early • stages on one or two industries at a (time I do not shut my eyes to the dangers which may exist in the licensing, of industry. We shall have to be careful not to stifle progress; but there Are so many cases in which licensing provisions are urgently required. However, if we recognise the dangers We will be in*’a position to avoid them'.”' ■ 1 ' “Does fho Minister, think it wise that the Bureau of Industries and the Min- , aster should have the last word when licenses are being issued?” asked Mi iW.vP. Endean (Nat,, Parnell), . “Ho Minister would desire personalty to take the responsibility." Mid Mr "Sullivan, "but Inhis owm field the charge of a department U reprewhtativeof -the State Mk The Minister may *p< person or persons to report Ufca license.” iM i themjto ■to a court?” “There may .be involved, and . you may be

STRONG 'ATTACK OK BILL “Complete Framework Of Soviet System” MR HOLLAND’S SPEECH [From Our Parliamentary Reporter] • WELLINGTON, October 1. “This bill can undoubtedly be interpreted as the complete framework of a Soviet system, save that private Ownership is to remain,’’ said Mr .S. G. Holland (Nat, Christchurch North) when discussing the Industrial Efficiency Bill during the second reading debate on the bill in the House of Representatives this evening. Mr Hoi-' land, while voicing the view that the manufacturers of the country would all welcome any move to ensure greater industrial efficiency, claimed that bureaucratic control of industry would never be voluntarily accepted. Mr Holland said that it seemed to him that the bill represented a. gigantic structural framework to wnich weatherboards would be applied by regulations; There was a general wish to see the development of new industries oh; a sound basis and increased industrial efficiency; but the Minister ha A admitted that the bill, if wrongly applied, could be of danger to the Dominion. The industrial system of New Zealand and, in fact, that of any country, was not in a position, however, to take the risk involved in any dangerous piece of legislation. Either the Dill should be more thoroughly thought out and more carefully planned, Mr Holland thought, or it should not be introduced at all.

‘T would spy that, by and large, the industries of New Zealand are reasonably efficient,” Mr Holland said; “but there is still room for improvement, of course, and there will always be as the world progresses. I believe that a real live bureau can bring immense service to industry, particularly in an advisory capacity. I think that the Minister would find that industry in New Zealand would welcome with open arms an advisory bureau, which, as part of its work, would assist by cooperating with the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research and pass on Ihe results obtained, but It is an entirely different story when It comes to handing over the management of industry to the bureau.” Mr Holland, When criticising the proposal to establish a bureau, composed of civil servants, paid, tribute, to the civil service for its capacity, to c&rry on Its own particular work, but he claimed it could not be expected that Civil servants trained in their own peculiar sphere could be expected to .step into the management of industry and achieve similar success there. He would not agree at all to the proposal to hand over industry to a •bureau composed of civil servants. Definite Limit oil Profits 1 “This bill means State control of industry, with private ownership and private capital retained, but with a definite limit on profits,” Mr Holland said. “If a scheme of socialistic control of industry fails, private enterprise will bear the entire loss. If the scheme succeeds, the profits made by private enterprise will be definitely restricted. When it comes to bureaucratic Control of industry, I think that nil industry will join with me in saying that it will not stand for such a scheme.” Criticisms of the bill which he had received from manufacturers were quoted by Mr Holland. He had received representations that some manufacturers were very nervous about the effects of the measure, he said. Another complaint was that it was absurd to band over New Zealand’s industries to bureaucratic control. Other representations made: it clear that ihe manufacturers definitely objected to Worker representation, on industrial committees, the objection being raised that manufacturers sitting on the same committees as employers with representatives of their employees could not be expected to give away trade secrets. It was also claimed by Mr Holland that the men , on the interim Bureau of Industry, who, he supposed; would also find a place on the final bureau, were so* busy with their own departmental duties that they could not find time Jto devote to that additional important v/ork. He also objected to the prospect of the bureau always having a majority of Government officers. The bill did not respect the rights of private individuals, he said, It was also wrong, in principle that the bm should provide for the payment Of expenses incurred in preparing an industrial plan by the industries concerned. If the State assisted ip development of agriculture financially, Why not the development of secondary industries?

. The Minister may appoint a judge of the Supreme Court, or a magistrate, or a group of experts to do that work, mid Mr Sullivan. Mr Endean: Why hot mention a tribunal? “it am not going to argue with the honourable gentleman," said Mr Sullivan, “but I would get as near as possible to the course I have mentioned under the terms of the bill. I think that would be a substantial safeguard.”