STRONG PROTESTS

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21907, 7 October 1936, Page 10

STRONG PROTESTS

Industrial Efficiency Bin

SECOND-READING DEBATE

< OPPOSITION MEMBERS* CRITICISM

IProm Our Parliamentary Reporter]

WELLINGTON, October 6.

The critical attitude of the Op- . position ie the Industrial Efficiency Bill seems to have strengthened over the week-end, according to the strong protests which members on that side made during the resumed second-reading debate on the bill In the House of Representatives to-day. Earlier speakers in the debate among the opposing forces had been inclined to see a good deal in favour of some of the important principles embodied In this measure; but to-day the general run of criticism was almost entirely against it. The House spent all the afternoon and the evening until the adjournment at 10.30 p.m. on the bill, and by that time had not yet finished the second-reading debate.

The fear that the Industrial Effici.ency Bill was designed to allow the Government to exercise socialistic control over all industry was expressed by Mr J. Hargest (Nat., Awarua). “The setting-up of, any competent body to advise the Government and ‘industry generally on industrial development would be welcome,” Mr Har* gest said. “However, the aim of this bill does not appear to be the establishment of a competent advisory body, but rather complete Government control, In the first place, there is an allembracing definition cf industry. I take it that the Minister intends to bring under the legislation the farming industry of this country, so that he will be able to dictate just what crops will be planted, just what flocks will be kept, and the entire management of the industry. If he has it in his mind to manage the farming industry on these lines, he would be well advised to remember what has happened in the United States dusing the last few years.’* "Two Main Objectives” The bill had two main objectives, Mr Hargest continued. In the first place it offered a sop to the manufacturing industries by making it impossible for new Industries to start Second, it aimed at making the Minister for. Industries and Commerce the industrial dictator of the whole country. “This country was built up by the enterprise and ability of the ordinary private business man and farmer,” Mr Hargest said. “There has been amazing progress in less than a hundred years; and if private enterprise is left alone it is safe to predict that there will be an even greater advance during the second hundred years of our history.' Industrialists, as business men, knoW the difficulties with whlclr they are confronted, and although the present Minister and the present Government have been interested in industry for years their interest has been solely on the tide of the Workers. The bill give* every indication that the Government intends to socialise and sovletise industry.” The (minion that the Industrial Efficiency Bill contemplated the payment of compensation in cases where an industry Was adversely affected by any rationalisation plan was voiced by the Attorney-General (the Hon. H. G. R. Mason). He said he thought that those who received benefits as a result of the operation of, the bill would be quite willing that any funds obtained by way of levy should be used in part to indemnify those who suffered any detriment. "Order in Industry** "The purpose of this bill is not to prevent anyone making undue profits —another bill has been passed for that purpose—but to introduce order into industry,” said the Minister. “The member for AwdrUa talks of the glories of competition; but unrestricted competition has Hot proved the salvation of industry. The results of unrestricted competition ate far ■ from being so glorious as the member for Awarua suggests. To resist the bill is to plead for waste and extravagance. The time lot the Introduction of a bill of this sort is long overdue. If there are any deficiencies In this bill, I hope that we shall have tbe help of the members of the Opposition in showing where it can be improved instead of that glorification of confusion which their statements amount to. We can no longer have waste and confusion in industry. The job has to be tackled, and postponement will not make it any easier.” The claim that the bill was much too indefinite, and placed far too wide a power in the hands of the Minister, Was made by the Hon. A. Hamilton (Nat., Wallace). bill does not deal with any particular problem, and it deals with all sorts Of things—with anything and nothing,” said Mr Hamilton. The Minister fear Internal Affairs (the Hon. W. E. Parry): Well, why object to it?- . Mr Hamilton: Because of its very mdeflniteness. No one doubted that there should be order, in business, continued Mr Hamilton; but because there was 10 per cent of disorder in business or in society there was no reason why it should be regimented 100 per cent. Voluntary arrangements would be certain to Operate Much more satisfactorily. "Should Scrap the Bui” “The Minister has asked lor helpful criticism of the bill,*' Mr Hamilton said. “I am prepared to offer some by suggesting that he Should scrap the bill, ' and bring in one that will deal with some definite branch of Industry. As it is. ills bill will hang over the head of every industry in the country until it hems to operate, and no one knows when that will be, since the only operative part of the bill is Mat which sets up a board.” The bill took power out of the hands of Parliament and transferred it to the Minister, said Mr Hamilton. It Was essential that any legislation should possess elements of definiteness and finality; bdt the bill had neither of those qualities. The Minister for Industries and Commerce (the Hon. D. O. Sullivan): You cannot be definite with a biU. of this ki §&e Hon. J. O. Cobbe (Nat, Oroua) ciainted that while the intentions behind the bill might be good, it was a hasty, ill-conceived, and rash experiment He suggested that the Government shouldnold over tbe measure mr atrleast a year for further consMrM.. worthlbs paper it is wrlttenon.” said Mr Wright (fed, Weuihgtou Suburb*). *T believe it will .break «ow* Ji SMm a* its provisionsare put into ea&i it* real purpose is to sup- . port mgs And combines and maintain • the guise of rationallsafrhoTn (Govt, Thames) denied! thfti titedfc Would be any element of diptaigmhlp In the Administration Of the mil Thefe Would, be a sufficient . proportion of Stale Representatives oh the bureau is prevent victimisation.