ANTI-PROFITEERING

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 31, 5 August 1936, Page 7

ANTI-PROFITEERING

BILL IN COUNCIL

The debate on the Prevention of Profiteering Bill was resumed in the Legislative Council • after "The • Post" went^o press yesterday. Hon. R. Masters said that th« basis fixed for the price as at June 1, 1936, was impracticable.- If a-man was profiteering prior to J\ine 1, the Bill would" permit, him to continue his charge. Was'the trader to be. allowed to take into consideration replacement value? The Board of Trade Act was practicable.' He agreed with the principle of the legislation, but thought it

unnecessaryThe"Hon. % F. Doyle said that rthe price of coal in Southland had increased by 6s per ton. The Bill would help the small business man and prevent exploitation.

The Hon. WVW. Snodgrass contended that the provisions of 'the Board of Trade Act were sounder than those of the Bill. ' .... .

The Hon. J. Cotter said that.it" was possible for. a ring of people to rob the Government and, the people of the benefits proposed to. bfe given them.

The Hon. T. Bloodworth agreed" that the powers in the Bill were already in the Board of Trade Act. . The Hon. J. A. McCuflough pointed out-that if there was a right of appeal, big corporations could continue ;,the offence and defeat the objects-of the legislation. ■, ■./■.•-.. :~ ;.,-.;^'-v • The Hon. W. Perry said .that the blots on the Bill were-that-the pnus of proof was on the accused,.and that there was no right of .appeal, further, the fact that the - admissibility. of evidence was left entirely to the .Magistrate, even though the evidence might not be admissible in a legal- sense, made the necessity for appeal greater. The Hon. R. McCallum supported an attempt to prevent, profiteering; but thought that there-was.sufficient .legislation for the purpose on ,'the. Statute Book now

The Hon. B. C. Robbiris considered that the prevention of , profiteering should be undertaken first'_with'the manufacturer and tfte wholesaler.'Keen, competition then would keep; prices down. • •■'.'■'■

The Hon. J. Alexander said he would oppose the Bill in its present form.' The debate was adjourned arid' th« Council rose at 4.45 p.m. • ' ;;"'■"