The Dominion. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1944. THE PROBLEMS AHEAD

Dominion, Volume 38, Issue 22, 20 October 1944, Page 4

The Dominion. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1944. THE PROBLEMS AHEAD

Ju its recent annual report the New Zealand Employers’ Federation stated: “Antiquated ideas and misunderstandings must be put overboard, both by employers and by organized labour, if we are to proceed with any degree of hope to a solution of the industrial problems which appear to continue unabated from year to year.” The same or similar problems are being faced in other countries, especially in Great Britain, where proposals of an unprecedentedly, farreaching character have been placed before the nation for criticism and suggestion. For the most part the official British White Papers outlined mainly a broad basis of policy and this, it has been said, was done deliberately, in order to secure the maximum of agreement in that respect before proceeding to the difficulties of the details. The result is that, broadly speaking, the people of the United Kingdom know the lines of approach favoured by the Government, and all sections can examine them as fully as they wish. No doubt the Trades Union Congress, which is meeting this week, will express its views on the issues.

The British method has much to commend it. Recently the House of Commons devoted three days to a debate on post-war employment policy, and succeeded in drawing forth a useful measure of constructive ideas from all sections of the chamber. Perhaps as good a starting point as any for the consideration of these matters — if not the only really practical one—was given, during the debate referred to, by Sir George Schuster; He insisted, states one report, “that the attainment of all economic objectives—not only those of full employment and social security but the wider objectives of a rising standard of living—depend absolutely upon the efficiency and productivity of the national economic machinery.” ' Commenting on this basic fact —as applicable here as in the Mother Country—the London Economist said: “It cannot be too often repeated that all the rosy dreams of the present depend entirely upon the size of the national income.” And that depends, in turn, upon an improved productive efficiency without exception—employer and employee, public servant and individual shopkeeper and farmer. The task that inevitably will face this Dominion is the maintenance, at the highest possible level, of the national income. It cannot be achieved by heavy expenditure on State undertakings. The stress must be placed on production and on increasingly efficient production, and that is not the task of any one section of the community but of every section. The individual, group or section—and it does not matter whether in the ranks of the employers or employees—that limits production and, at the same time demands a larger slice of the national income, either in the form of higher profits or increased wages, is adopting an anti-social course. The position was aptly summed up ,by the London Times recently when it said: “Quite simply, the standard of living of the people of Britain depends upon the output of British industry.” That is also true of New Zealand, and it brings the problem home to the individual as well as to the organization. The danger is that in the post-war period this demand for increased efficiency—reflected in output—will be viewed in much the same light as many people have regarded stabilization —something for the other person to attend to. ’