Reorganising Flax Industry

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 159, 2 April 1937, Page 13

Reorganising Flax Industry

Sir, —The report of the meeting between flax-growers and millers and merchants with the Bureau of Industry representatives as issued by the Minister of Industries and Commerce published in your Saturday’s issue constitutes a very one-sided statement and could only have been compiled by the officers of the bureau, who were the only “reporters” present. The Minister was not present at the meeting (his unavoidable absence was apologised for by the chairman) " therefore any statement made by him about “gratifying feature” and “pleasing feature” respectively regarding the representative attendance and “spirit of co-opera-tion in the industry” must have been private expressions of opinion on his part to the parties responsible for reporting the meeting to him and the compiling of the report for the Press. Whether such a report to the Minister was justified must furely be disputed by many who attended. The actual fact ie that it was intimated to the bureau by a representative spokesman (who was called upon by the chairman to speak) that the industry had not had an opportunity of discussing the matter among themselves prior to meeting the bureau, and he then asked whether the meeting of that morning could not be postponed for one month so that they would have time for such discussions.

It was agreed that the taking of a vote of the industry as to whether any Government plan would be accepted or rejected would be postponed for one month and the meeting then proceeded to a tentative discussion of the terms of the plan proposed by the bureau and stated to have been approved of by the Government. . It was made perfectly clear by Mr. Schmitt, as chairman, that no plan of any kind would be imposed on the flax industry against its wishes, and that the fully 50 per cent, favourable vote of those interested as required by statute must represent also “the weight of the industry” and not merely one flax-grower or mills against another. In fairness, therefore, to all parties it should now be distinctly understood that the destiny of the flax industry is thus still in the hands of those interested and cannot be transferred to either Government or Bureau of Industry without their voting to this effect. It is thus wholly misleading to state with regard to the committee appointed that This special committee of the industry has been appointed so as to assist the bureau in bringing the plan to a stage of finality and agreement with tlie representatives of the industry, so that with the recommendation of such representatives all persons engaged in the industry will approve of tlie provisions of the plan which will be put into operation under the Industrial Efficiency Act. There was no suggestion of “will be put into operation” in the sense of a confiscation of the industry. The statement may thus appear to b.e somewhat misleading, inasmuch as it should have stated “the adoption or rejection” of the plan, and not merely stated the positive suggestion only. The discussions at the meeting on such words as “control by the Government,” “guaranteed prices,” and the plan of the bureau having to be adopted “in its entirety” were certainly indicative of very material non-unanimity of opinion, and serious absence of a “spirit of co-operation” among those who are likely to be most affected. On many salient features it was quite impossible for members of the bureau present to speak with any assurance as to what might or might not happen. The Government “may” do this or do that. It seems a pity, nevertheless, that such meetings, which ar.e so far-reaching in their indirect influence on other trades as well as the particular one under discussion, are not open to the Press and reported upon by men who are specially trained in the science of supplying an impartial statement of the questions discussed. I suggest, Sir, that you seek out others who were present at th.e said meeting so that their opinions also may be ascertained on the correctness or otherwise of the statements said to have been issued by the Minister.—l am, etc., VERITAS. Wellington, March 27. [When asked to comment on the above letter, the Hon. D. G. Sullivan, Minister of Industries and Commerce, stated that the meeting was called for the purpose of enabling those interested in the flax industry to have a preliminary discussion on the proposed plan for the rehabilitation of that Industry. The chief points in the plan were fully discussed and a committee representing the interests attending the meeting was set up in the afternoon by those present for the purpose of going more closely into the whole of the proposals. It was decided by that committee, which was elected in the absence of any members of the .Bureau of Industry, that it would meet the bureau representatives on April 14. “Notwithstanding the views expressed by your correspondent, the representatives present at the meeting passed a vote of appreciation for the work that had been done by the Government and the bureau In preparing a plan for the consideration of the Industry. There can be no doubt whatever as to the overwhelming support given to the plan, particularly by tlie growers and millers,” concluded the Minister.]