REPLY TO CRITICISM

Dominion, Volume 36, Issue 306, 21 September 1943, Page 6

REPLY TO CRITICISM

Decisions Of Bureau Of Industry

X replv to an editorial published in the “Otago Daily Times” on Septemlx'r !•> commenting on the extent to w w , regulation of business was alleged to ba Lee appropriated by the Governmen was made yesterday by the of Industries and Commerce, Ml. huunam The editorial also quoted of Hie Bureau of Industry during the past four months declining certain applications tor permission to begin business tn. v.armus licensed industries or for permission to extend, operations under existing licences, and these were republished in lhe Do 111 “The’editorial.” said the Minister, “is deliberately intended to mislead, the. pub - lie, as the following facts will snow . Durin- the past four months the Bureau of Industry has dealt with 210 applications for new licences or for extensions to existing licences, of which 188 bn e been granted and 22 declined. If applications for approval to the transfer ot existing licences are taken into account, lhe total number of applications granted is very substantially increased In tie light of these figures the extent ol the control actually exorcised over the entry of now units into fields of activity brought within tile scope of the Industrial Ltlieicncy Act, or over the expansion »f operations under licences already issued, is not nearly so great as the ‘Otago Daily Times’ would have the public believe. “It. is worth while drawing attention to the right of appeal provided under the Act whereby any applicant foi a licence whose application is declined nay appeal to the Industrial Efficiency Appeal Authority. Sir Francis Frazer. The method of control exercised under the Act is therefore democratic, as a final appeal can be made lo a judge of outstanding experience. , . . “There is no obscurity about decisions of Hie Bureau of Industry, as suggested by Hie ‘Otago Daily Times.' as each applicant, who in the final analysis is Hie person mainly affected, is advised by letter by the bureau of ils decision, and every opportunity given to appeal if the decision is not favourable. “With a view to protecting the rights of licensees, now members ol Hie armed forces. it has been found necessary by the bureau in a number' of cases' lo decline to grant, permanent licences. Under the Industrial Efficiency Emergency Regulations. 1943. provision has been made for the issue of temporary licences to assist in maintaining supplies of essential commodifies from licensed industries, while, al: the same time, affording protection of licensees now in the forces. These licences are for definite limited periods only and may be cancelled as licensees return to take up their peacetime occupations.”