CONTROL OF INDUSTRY

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 25, 24 October 1936, Page 10

CONTROL OF INDUSTRY

Bill Passed by Council

Iu contrast with the fight put up by the Opposition in the House of Representatives against the Industrial Efficiency Bill, the measure had a fairly easy passage through the Legislative Council yesterday. The second reading debate was kept going for three hours and a quarter by half a dozen speakers who condemned the Bill and by. as many who gave it. more or less critical support. A division was called for by the Hon. W. Perry (Wellington) on the second reading and the following six members voted “No” with him: —The Hons. Sir James Allen, J. Alexander, E. R. Davis, W. Hayward, H. A. Russell and F. Waite. The “Ayes” numbered 18. Tho Bill wont through committee unchallenged and was road a third time and passed.

During the debate, the Leader of the Council, Hon, Mark Fagan, said it was difficult to reconcile the harsh criticism of the legislation with its provisions, which could be regarded as being beneficial to the country’. The Government had no desire to harass industry but wished to assist it by cliiuiuatiug waste and inefficiency. The Hon. R. Masters (Taranaki) contended that industry was better able to prepare its own plan than any body of civil servants. He supported the Bill, however, saying that he hoped it might be beneficial. The Hon. T. Bloodworth (Auckland) said tho Bill could have been made more democratic, but it was inevitable that, under the new conditions, the State would have to interest itself still further in the control of industry.

Other speakers were the Hom AV. AV. Snodgrass tNelson), who welcomed Hie Bill, the Hon, 11. McCallum (Marlborough) who said Hie measure would lie beneficial- if properly administered, the Hon. L>. Buddo (Canterbury». who expressed fear t'hal expansion of New Zealand's industries would antagonise the United Kingdom, and the Hom H. A. Russell (Hawke’s Bay), who objected to Hie Bill because it placed too much power in Hie hands of Hie Minister.

‘‘’['here is a resemblance in this Bill to the system introduced into Italian industry in 1934,” said the Hon. AV. Perry (AVellington). His objection to the measure was supported by the Hon. J. Alexander (Auckland), who said the Bill was going too far. the Bureau of Industry merely being a pretty decoration io camouflage Ministerial control. I’lie Hon. AV. Hayward (Canterbury) said the Bill undermined the foundational principles on which British industry was built.