INDUSTRIAL MISSION

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 39, 14 August 1926, Page 9

INDUSTRIAL MISSION

MANUFACTURE IN AUSTRALIA

AMERICA'S PROSPERITY

A SEAECH FOB THE SECRET.

(From Our Own Correspondent.) SYDNEY, sth August. The surprise announcement by the Prime Minister at the end of last week that the Federal Government had decided to send to the United States a party of Australian industrialists, representing both employers and employees to study the reasons for the efficiency of American industry, caused widely-diverse comment. The proposal is claimed by the Town and Country Union, a Free Trade body, to .have originated in its suggestion to Mr. Bruce last April to send such a mission "to investigate and report upon the means and methods by which the pepole of America have secured a larger share of general prosperity than that enjoyed by the people of other countries." Th« decision was the subject of adverse comment by manufacturers in Sydney. The president of the local Chamber of Manufactures (Mr. S. F. Nowlands) claimed that the Prime Minister has emphasised the inefficiency of Australian manufacturers, while neglecting the point that the cause of the difference between Australian and American rates of production was the prevalence of pernicious doctrines resulting in a wrong attitude of mind and law forbidding payment for output. They considered that efficiency could be obtained best by individual effort and research, observation, imitation, and experiment in each separate industry. "One must look further afield,'' he added,'' to causes not necessarily to be found within the factory premises for America's prosperous industrial condition to-day. These include a truly protective tariff, development of industries rapidly enough to absorb immigration on a large scale, a consequent increase of home consumption, transport facilities to decentralise plants, keen internal competition, and ample funds for lesearch." DIVERSITY OF OPINION. On the other hand, the Employers' Federation in Sydney heartily approved the proposal, as did the Chamber of Manufactures and Employers' Federation in Melbourne and the other State capitals. The main view of the federation was that the' mission's best results would come from an investigation of the reasons -underlying the reasons for the better relations between employers and employees, in preference to an inquiry into the causes of increased rates of production. Manufacturers in other States than New South Wales, while approving the Ministry's decision, tempered that approval with the view that the mission would be worthless unless it were composed of the right men, who would enter into the inquiry with unprejudiced minds.

Most Labour organisations in the various State capitals endorsed the proposals^ particularly if the unions were allowed to choose their own delegates and if each State were represented, but again Sydney provided the voice of distension. The local Trades Hall opinion was strongly against the sending of the mission. "I think it will be a very fine picnic, and the country will have the pleasure of footing the bill," was the, remark of one union secretary. This official summed up Sydney's Labour opinion when ho said: "Mr. Bruce apparently does not realise that we know a great deal about America, and its methods of efficiency and speeding-up systems. "We can find out all we want by-reading and from inquiries from our own people who have worked in America. We were always of opinion that Mr. Bruce knew little about the manufactures of this country. The fact that he now wants to send somebody away to obtain the information confirms our view." Another Sydney official declared that the only unionists who would support the scheme would be those who thought they had an opportunity of being one of the party.