Reconstruction

Press, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23805, 26 November 1942, Page 4

Reconstruction

Within the last few days the chairman of the Rehabilitation Board, Mr M. Moohan, and Mr J. W. Mawson, the Government’s Town Planning Officer, have made statements which ought to be read in conjunction. Mr Moohan sketched official plans to establish servicemen in civil life again, emphasising the variety and liberality of the arrangements to give them financial assistance. In addition, and more usefully, he said that a survey of industrial requirements was “ being “ undertaken,” and this, it was “hoped,” would systematise information " on the ability of industry “ to absorb men in the production “ of goods and services.” Moreover, “social services would be ex- “ tended and improved as rapidly “ as possible,” and every effort made “ to establish economic secur- “ ity for all.” These statements are t-o general to be assessed; but their interest appear- in the suggestion, indistinct as it is, that the Rehabilitation Board has begun to think of its task as one that cannot be limited to the devices of rehabilitation, or will be badly done if it is limited in that way. Plans to find employment for soldiers, or to help them find it for themselves, will have a short-range value, at best, and may rapidly produce vicious consequences, unless they are integral i in a reconstruction policy, in which social and economic designs are complements. Mr Mawson touched this point wtyen he said that “ town planners are at a serious “loss,” while national policy in the loc: ;ion of industries is uncertain. The Rehabilitation Board, he appears to feel confident, will produce such a policy, or assist the Government to produce it. He expected “ excellent results in the near future” from the board’s work, particularly in this field. It is to be hoped that Mr Mawson is right. He may know more of what the board is doing than it has made public. But it cannot be overlooked, first, that the board is bound by the Rehabilitation Act, a very defective piece of legislation; and second, that the conditions in which the board works are otherwise unfavourable. Few if any of its members are free to devote themselves wholly to its work; and it does not appear to have the services of ar. adequate technical staff. These handicaps—legislative and administrative —are likely to be insuperable until the Government itself realises that larger policy issues are involved than it has faced and prepared for. The E >,ish Government, for example, approached its problems more wisely when it instructed the Uthwatt and Scott committees. The Scott committee was specially concerned with rural areas. When it reported, in August, it warned the Government against any “en- “ forced or artificial dispersal of industry, bringing to the country

“unwilling town-dwellers,” and insisted that it was fundamentally necessary to “improve housing and “ general living conditions, and so “ equalise economic, social, and “educational opportunities in town “ and country that those who pre- “ fer the country will no longer find “ themselves and their children at a “permanent disadvantage.” That is as true in New Zealand as in Britain. There is little indication, however, that the Government recognises in it the sort of truth that ought to govern post-war planning and present preparation.