EFFICIENCY BILL

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 97, 21 October 1936, Page 8

EFFICIENCY BILL

PASSED BY THE HOUSE

GOVERNMENT USES THE CLOSURE

AN ALL-NIGHT SITTING

The frequent application of the closure, always accompanied by a more or less half-hearted protest from the Opposition, enabled the Government,to force the Industrial Efficiency Bill through the House of Representatives at 6.55 o'clock this morning, after members had been kept sitting through the night. Opposition /members, supported by the Independent member for Wellington Suburbs (Mr. R. A. Wright), challenged practically cveiy clause, but the Prime Minister (the Rt. Hon. M. J. Savage) was in no mood to allow lengthy discussion on any of the clauses. .Mr Savage was on his feet as often as most members during the night, but on each . occasion' his speech was brief and to ihe point—"l move that the question be now put." The committee stage of the Bill was resumed about 3 o'clock yesterday afternoon, and it was not until 5.45 o'clock this morning that the measure emerged unscathed in spite of the close attention paid to it. The House immediately proceeded to the third reading,, which was carried at 6.55 a.m. by 37 votes to 13. The House then adjourned until. 2.30 o'clock this afternoon.

The Prime Minister (the Rt. Hon. M. J. Savage) moved that urgency be accorded the passing of the Bill. This was challenged by the Opposition, but the motion was carried, by 41 votes to 15. . ■ ■ . the Rt, Hon. J. G. Coates (National, Kaipara) moved an amendment that aimed at confining the scope of the Bill to manufacturing industries only. He complained that at present every trade and occupation could be brought within the operations of the BilL Mr. W. J. Broadfoot (National, Waitomo) said the Bill was a gift to the manufacturers for the higher wages and shorter hours. As it stood at present it would bring every type of trade and industry under direct Government control. Mr. W. A. Bodkin (National, Central Otago) said that the Bill would be responsible for a great deal of antagonism. The only people who-had given the Bill their blessing were the manufacturers. He agreed that there was need for planning in the manufacturing industries, because in a'number of them uneconomic units had been created; ■ , Mr. W.J. Poison (National, Stratford) said the Bill gave the Minister and his bureau power to control Parliament, and also the farming industry, if it was so desired. .., * THE AIR CLEARED*. The Minister of Industries and -Commerce (the Hon. D. G. Sullivan) said that trie amendment cleared the air. The Opposition seemed to be satisfied that the Bill was a good-Bill as it applied to the manufacturers. Mr. S. G. Holland (National, Christchurch -North): The Minister cannot, take that point out of it! The Minister said he took the amendment as a compliment to the principle embodied in the Bill. "If this Bill is good as it applies to the manufacturing industries," said Mr. Sullivan, "then it appears to me, from representations that have been made to me, that it is even more necessary in regard to other industries outside the manufacturing industries." ' . '•',"•' • He mentioned the chemists, who had been told to put their house in order last session, so that they could take advantage of mass buying in order-to meet competition. If the amendment was carried trie chemists, who needed the Bill, would be deprived. of the benefits of its operation. There were also the fish and flax industries. He had .'representations day after day and week after week from industries askingfor'legislation of. this kind. He received hundreds and hundreds of telegrams and letters asking for it. Mr. S. G. Smith (National, New .Plymouth): You could not produce fifty of them. The Minister: They come from every part of the Dominion and from nearly every industry. I 'have not had one single protest against this measure except from the Chambers of Commerce. He went on to say that if the Bill passed, an overseas firm was prepared to put £60,000 into one of the Dominion's industries. The Hon. W. E. Parry: And employ fifty men. Mr. Smith: What is the special consideration? Mr. Parry: There is no special "consideration. Mr. Sullivan explained that the Bill provided that unless the weight of an industry was in favour of any plan that might be drafted, that plan would not be applied. There was no more democratic thing to be found anywhere in the, world, The weight of industry would determine the matter itself. Mr. T. D. Burnett (National, Temuka): Is the opinion of the weight of industry always in the best interests of the country? The Minister: Even if the whole industry wanted it, and we were not satisfied that it was in the best interests of the country, we would step in. It is the' Government's duty to defend the public interest. Everything. will be out in the open, and everybody in the country will know everything that is being done. "NOTHING BUT DISAPPROVAL." The Hon. J. G. Cobbe (National, Oroua) said he had met a.large number of farmers lately and heard nothing but disapproval. Mr. Smith said the Minister had got into a mess over the Bill. He indicated that under the measure harbour boards could be attacked and small boards abolished in order to build up the business of the boards at the main ports. The Government had turned a beautiful somersault. It had gone to the. country with a policy of abolishing boards and was now setting up bureaus or committees —the same thing under a different name. The Minister should give a clear indication to -the House in respect of the position of harbour boards. Mr. Coates said his view .was one of Uncompromising opposition to the BilL The Minister had said there was no opposition. "There is violent opposition," said Mr. Coates. There was opposition by manufacturers, opposition in the daily Press. The Minister might laugh but individuals from" one end of the country to the other had expressed opposition to the Bill. "The manufacturers are not unanimous on the Bill," continued Mr. Coates. "It is about 50-50." If a monopoly was given it would not be a matter of £60,000 being invested, but hundreds of thousands of pounds. The manufacturer was up against a problem today that was bigger than any that had been encountered for many years. Costs had suddenly increased owing to the switch over to the 1931 wage level and the reduction in working hours. In some industries the increase was 25 per cent, and in others as; high as 50 per cent. The present safeguards were therefore' inadequate to assist the local manufacturer. He believed the • Government had been asked what it proposed to do about it. The Government had brought in a comprehensive Bill to shelve its direct responsibilities. tariff rates were not sufficient to cover the increased costs and, the Govern-

ment would have to face up to . the position. MORE PROTECTION? Mr. Poison said that by no stretch of imagination could it be held that on account of the amendment that sought to exclude everybody from the Bill but manufacturers the Opposition was in favour of the legislation. The Opposition had voted against the Bill on the second readiing. He would not deny the manufackirers the right to have some' say in respect to the organisation and - co-operation as far as their business was; concerned. They desired to organise their industries so as not to increase costs and to place them on a better footing. They had said they would not ask for additional protection and he was prepared to give the manufacturers the opportunity of doing that. An illustration in respect to the Bill had been quoted it respect to harbour boards sand so there might also be monopolies created "in.regard to other occupations." ' Other evils might also come into existence under the Bill. It was in a spirit of co-operation that the amendment was moved, said Mr. Bodkin. He submitted that the manufacturers could put their own house in order without the Bill. He believed the manufacturers could, see in the Bill opportunities of getting benefits at the expense of the public. MINISTERIAL CONTROL. The. Hon. A. Hamilton (National, Wallace) said that the clause was the key to the whole Bill, as it brought every industry in New Zealand' under its scope. "It- is so far-reachingI,"' he .added,, "that it almost frightens one that we should set out on an-errand so large." His chief objection to the clause, Mr. Hamilton said, was that it handed over the whole of industry to the Control of the Minister. He was surprised that the Government members should allow Parliament to hand over all its powers to the Government itself. The Minister ought to come to Parliament with definite plans for the industries that were in need of reorganisation. That was what the country was disturbed about. Mr. Parry: The country is not disturbed in the slightest. < Mr. Hamilton said the Government had not been in office long enough to appreciate the evil effect; of taking powers that it, did not intend to exercise. Mr. P,arry: The country is in good heart: After the clause had been under discussion^ for an hour and a half the closure 5 -was moved by the , Prime. Minister to the accompaniment of protests frbm the Opposition benches. The closure was carried on division by 39 votes to 16, and Mr. Coates's amendment was defeated by 41 votes to 16. - The House then divided on an amendment by- Mr< Hamilton to exclude the farming industry from the scope of the BilL This was defeated by 4L votes to 15; and the clause was passed by 39 votes to 16. BUREAU PERSONNEL. Mr. Poison endeavoured to amend the constitution, of the bureau by putting forward a motion that it should not consist of more than six Government members. '■ The Minister said that the manufacturers regarded the- bureau,as their friend, and were satisfied with the present constitution.! They would sooner place confidential details of their business before a bureau of civil servants than before their business rivals. Mr. Poison said that he desired to guard against the bureau being controlled by civil servants, who, after alt did not have the qualities, that industrialists possessed. Mr. H. S. S. Kyle (National, Eiccarton) suggested that the Minister should accept Mr. Poison's amendment. Mr. Sullivan: There are more likely to be five Government- members than six. ' . ' Mr. Kyle: Then why not put that in the Bill? The Minister shook his head. Mr. Coates said he .must enter his emphatic protest against the clause, which gave the Minister a complete right to appoint as many members from the Government side aS he thought fit. An Opposition member: Lookout, the Prime Minister might move the gag. Mr. Coates: I don't care what the Prime Minister does. Free speech is not to be tolerated in this House any longer. The moment we touch on a subject that gels under the ribs of the Government on goes the closure. No opportunity is given members to discuss the serious matters that,come before the House. There was a round of laughter when 'the Prime Minister rose to move the closure, which was applied by 38 votes tol6- ... Mr. Poison's amendment was defeated by 40 votes to 16, and a further amendment by Mr. S. G. Holland (National, Christchurch North) seeking to limit the appointment of members of the bureau to- a term of three years was defeated by 40 votes to 15: The clause was retained by 40 votes to 16. "A TORY CLAUSE." Discussion then took place on the clause giving the Minister power to appoint the chairman, and deputy of the Bureau of Industry. Mr. Wright said a more hide-bound Tory clause had never before been included in a Bill. ,He thought ■ that in a democratic country the idea was to trust the people and allow them to express themselves. The bureau should be trusted to appoint its own chairman. The only deduction that could be drawn was that the chairman and deputy chairman were to be the puppets of the Minister. "The bureau is now in the Minister's pocket," he added. The Minister of Lands (the Hon. F. Langstohe): You are only being egged on by front benchers. Mr. Wright: I am not being egged on. I am speaking from my own personal point of view. I am an interested party. We; can be wiped out of business by this Bill.' Mr. Coaies-.asked who-theJVTinistec

intended to appoint to the chairmanship. The Minister of Lands (facetiously): He may appoint Mr. Sterling. Mr. W. J. Broadfoot (National, Waitomo): Or the Rev. Mr. Scrimgedur. A CHANGE IN FOKM. Mr. Coates said the mind of the, Government was changing daily. To use ■ sporting parlance, all the members of1 the Government should be taken before the stewards for their change in form. Mr. Coates said that some unfortunate civil servant would have to shoulder the onerous duties as chairman. .If the Government had confi-1 dence in the members of the board, the board should choose its own chairman. The Minister said that the chairman would have to be an officer in whom the Minister had confidence. The bureau had appointed a chairman ever ■since it had been functioning, and he would,probably go; on. (Mr. .L. J. Schmitt, Secretary'of the Department of Industries and Commerce, is the present dhairman,) Mr. Poison said all'dictators became afraid of their own .lieutenants. The Minister was hot prepared to trust his own appointees on- the. board. The members! of .the board had to work with the chairman, and should appoint himi • Mr. A. iG. Hultqiust (Government, Bay of Plenty): What-,about the Railways *Board? Mr. Osborne (Government, Manukau): And the Unemployment Board? Mr. Poison: There is a frogs' chorus around me. (Laughter.) Mr. Poison said the chairman would do the will of the Minister irrespective of the merits of the case. That was the idea in the Minister's mind. It was an insult tc? the members of the board. Mr. Kyle said, he was prepared to see the .Minister taking up the position of chairman of the bureau: What had- the present chairman done? he asked.; Referring to, the Bill itself, he said? it had black lines all over it showing the amendments and deletions since the Bill was first drafted. There were six pages of mourning. If that was the way the chairman would handle. industry, then "Lord help industry in, New Zealand!" ' Tfie-Minister: A mean kind of argument against a man who cannot protect himself. Mr.' Bodkin said the Unemployment Board arid the Railways Board only administered State/funds or revenue. When private property was being dealt with in respect to the Meat Board and the Dairy Board the election of chairmen was left in .the hands of the members of the boards. At 9 p.m. the Prime Minister moved the closure, and this was carried by 39 votes ito 16. The clause was then retained, on the voices. After supper discussion was resumed

on an amendment moved by Mr. Bodkin to delete sub-clauses 2 and 3 of : clause 5, which deals with the procedure at meetings of the bureau. At 10.30 p.m. the Prime Minister attempted to move the closure but Mr. Broadfoot was on his feet first and was permitted to fill in his time of five minutes. , When he sat .down the Prime Minister succeeded in moving the closure, which was carried by 37 votes to 17. The amendment was lost by 38 votes to 17 and the clause was passed by a similar vote. Clause 6, which provides that an officer of the Department shall be appointed secretary, of the bureau, was passed without division. Mr. Coates moved an amendment to the next clause with the object of removing tariff concessions or preferences and embargoes from the matters which the bureau can "consider. He said the provision was unsound and would not work. He thought the Government did not realise the trouble that would arise through giving the bureau power to recommend tariffs. A MOUNTAIN. ' The Minister said he thought Mr. Coates was: making a mountain out of a molehill. It was necessary to Hmow when a new industry was being established whether it could stand on its own feet,: or whether protection was necessary to enable; employment to be given to New Zealanders. The present Government was not looking to Customs barriers or tariff concessions as a means of building up industry in New Zealand. The Government was pressing to the full its policy of trade agreements and it might be necessary during the period of transition for some temporary additional protection to be given. Two clauses were passed without division and' with little discussion, which represented really, remarkable progress, but another • halt was called when the clause dealing with the setting up of industrial committees was r-eaehed. Mr. Smith moved an amendment designed to deprive the Minister of his power to dissolve industrial committees on the recommendation of the-bureau. After a short debate the closure was applied by 37 votes to 13, and the amendment: was defeated and the clause agreed to on similar votes. "WILD.. STATEMENTS." Mr. Coates' ndoved an amendment which sought to delete the provisions giving industrial committees extra powers over and above the powers necessary to carry out industrial phms. He alleged that there was ten:times as much money going out of the country a^s was coming in. The Minister:- We have heard those wild statements before. ; Mr. Coates: Is it a wild statement? He said that he had received a let-

ter that night from a firm which stated that £70,000 had gone put; The Minister of Education (the Hon. P. Fraser): It's just bunk. Mr. A. S. Richards (Government, Roskill): What are they purchasing overseas? The Minister of Labour (the Hon. H. T. Armstrong): What was removed? Mr. Coates: Cash was removed. Mr. Sullivan said that the Stock Exchange characterised such statements as purely political, propaganda. Mr. Coates: The Stock Exchange never said that. Mr. Sullivan: They did to a statement similar to the one you are making. Mr. Coates: Was it my statement? Mr. Sullivan: No, not your statement. Mr. Armstrong: Was land or industry taken out? The Minister of Lands (the Hon. F. Langstone): It's just baby talk. Mr. Coates: Tthe Hon. gentleman is the most competent mind in the country to talk about baby talk. Mr. Coates / asked, what action was to be taken 'to prevent money going out of the country. The closure was applied by 38 votes to 13, and the amendment was defeated, and the clause retained by the same Vote. ; :. , ■~,. IMPOSITION OF LEVIES. • On the clause giving power to, impose levies for the purpose of defraying the expenditure in relation to industrial plans Mr. Coates .said that surviving industries would have to find the compensation.^ Industry wouldj have to pay something to those who went out of business. The whole of iridustry would have to pay. He was unable to move an amendment because it would mean an appropriation, and he would be.ruled out of order. It was a trap, v ■ .:' . ' '. ■• "I think it is a pretty hot clause," he continued. ; "I think it is a replica of some of the legislation passed in foreign countries who have Fascist rule." The Minister of Education: Hear, hear* - Mr. Coates: The Minister says, hear, hear./ Let us have any amount of Fascism. j... Mr. F. W. Schfamm, (Government, Auckland East): How long are you going to keep us here?. Mr^ Coates: You can go home now. It is a free country. Mr. Schramm: Finish it up. The Minister said he had a grievance against the Opposition concerning the clause. When the original clause was introduced the Opposition; expressed indignation because therej was no .provision " for compensation.! Now that provision;had been made itwas wrong. The clause was asked for by the Opposition as! well as by Government members. , I Opposition chorus: Not this clause,The Minister said it was also asked for-by the manufacturers.

Mr. Coates: They had to. You had the wind up the whole lot of them. Mr. Schramm: You cannot put the wind up some of them.' They are pretty tough. . The Minister: I am disappointed. I am satisfied that nothing will please the Opposition. .■■■■.■'. The closure was then moved by the Prime Minister, despite a protest from Mr. Bodkin, who said the clause had not been thoroughly discussed. The closure was applied by 36 votes to 13, and the clause retained by the same vote. . . • •■■ , c V RESPECT FOR NEW MEMBERS. At 2.15 a.m., while clause 15 was under discussion, Mr. Wright moved that progress be reported. He said that there Were a number of new members in the House and they were not accustomed to keeping late hours. (Government laughter-). The motion was lost by 38 votes to 13. The Prime Minister then moved the closure, and Mr. Bodkin raised a point of order and asked that Mr. Speaker's ruling be obtained as to whether sufficient time had been allowed for discussion of the clause. The Chairman of Committees said that he was the sole judge of whether the question should be put and he ruled that there had been sufficient discussion. , Tho closure was carried by 38 votes •to 13, and the House immediately afterwards divided on the clause, which was retained by a similar vote. Mr. Holland moved an amendment to clause 16 to provide that any person lor company engaged in any existing industry which could continue in business only under licence should be entitled to an automatic licence. He said the 'amendment w.as a y reasonable one, and asked the MinisterHo accept it. The Minister said he could not accept the amendment, which would give absolute security to a man irrespective of whether his business was economic or1 otherwise. Circumstances might arise where a man might have to be put out of business though that was likely to occur in very few cases. The amendment was lost by 38 votes to J3 —the thirtieth division since the sitting began. The clause was passed on the voices and the next clause was also allowed to go through without challenge. Mr. Bodkin moved an amendment providing that where a licence was re;fused there should be the right of to a Magistrate, and not to the Minister, but the .amendment was de- ! feated, and the clause was retained by : 38 votes to 13:-' The remaining Clauses were passed, 1 and the House agreed to the .third' reading. The Bill was passed.