Manpower

Press, Volume LXXIX, Issue 24094, 2 November 1943, Page 4

Manpower

Although the Minister of Defence declared just before the General Election that it was impossible to release more men from the armed forces in New Zealand, it appears that the Prime Minister, ,who declared two days later that more men must be released, has prevailed. More men are being released, as the Hon. A. McLagan, Minister of National Service, showed in a statement reported on Saturday. From April to September, 12,240 had left the Army for industry; and since the beginning of October 700 more have followed, and “measures taken ensure that “this flow will continue for some “ time yet.” In addition, some hundreds of men have been released on appeal; and the return of men to industry “through rehabili“tation measures . . has now “ reached substantial proportions.” As a broad indication that a safer balance between manpower serving in the armed forces in New Zealand and manpower serving in produc-

tion is being steadily pursued, this is welcome; but it is not fully reassuring. One point is crucial. Among the 12,240 releases, April to September, Mr McLagan classified 426 as workers placed in sheepfarming, 1065 in dairying, and 875 in “ other farming, tobacco, and “vegetable growing.” This total of about 2400, Mr McLagan said, left very few farm workers still in the forces in New Zealand, and further releases would leave “ virtually “ none." More would have been released if more had been there; but 11 the great majority kad already “been released before-April 1.” Yet the farms are under-manned. The only possible inference from these facts, and from the 1942-1943 comparison used by Mr McLagan during the election campaign, is that drafts on farm labour were previously carried to reckless extremes. Drafting back has been large and continuous; yet, in spite of this, and in spite of emergency measures of all kinds, from the use of soldier labour to the recruiting of the Women’s Land Army, the industry is in grave difficulty. It is not being asked to maintain output; it is being asked to lift output to new levels. The evidence all too plainly suggests that its resources are inadequate, and that one of the chief deficiencies, if not definitely th chief deficiency, is labour. Mr McLagan’s figures are not enough. The country should be given a plainer account of its actual commitments and of the Government s plans to fulfil them.