The Press WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 1963. Dr. Finlay Calls For Harder Work

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30125, 8 May 1963, Page 14

The Press WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 1963. Dr. Finlay Calls For Harder Work

Dr. Martin Finlay’s presidential address to the annual conference of the New Zealand Labour Partycontained much good sense upon which any political party might well base its policy. His advocacy of harder work and a review of accustomed habits was noteworthy because of the way in which the Labour Party has campaigned—sometimes blindly—for progressively shorter working hours, higher rewards for less work, and greater leisure opportunities. It is satisfactory to find a Labour leader concerned, as Dr. Finlay apparently is, about the detrimental effects as well as the benefits of New Zealand’s social welfare system. Dr. Finlay is to be commended, also, for his reference to the folly of allowing expensive industrial equipment to lie idle because of the difficulties of arranging shift work. Many of New Zealand’s economic problems derive from inadequate use of machinery. By implication, Dr. Finlay condemned trade unionists who unreasonably oppose automation and other devices by which industry is made more efficient and more productive. If his view is heeded, New Zealand will avoid troubles that already are apparent in bigger countries. While Dr. Finlay’s “rejoicing” that Britain is not to enter the European Economic Community may be questioned, his encour-

agement of a realistic, practical response to the challenges of export trade is unexceptionable. Whether the Labour Party could supply the requisite stimulus any better than the present Government is very doubtful, if only because the prosperity of the export industries will be determined largely by external factors which are beyond the direct control of any New Zealand administration. It is traditional for Labour Party presidents to criticise speculators, to discuss in vague terms the redistribution of the national income, and to call for restraints over the disposal of private assets such as land. Dr. Finlay would have been better advised not to recall his party’s ineffectual endeavours to control land prices after the Second World War. No prudent person would want a return to the undesirable practices and the inflation of values that resulted from the Labour Government’s legislation. Dr. Finlay seems to forget that many persons of moderate means are among those who “ make ” money by means of investments. It is pointless to attempt to classify members of the community, as Dr. Finlay has tried to do, as “ workers ” or “ specula- “ tors ”. Much to be preferred is the view of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Nordmeyer) that the term “ class struggle ” should now be dropped.