STANDARDS BILL

Evening Post, Volume CXXXII, Issue 76, 26 September 1941, Page 6

STANDARDS BILL

PASSED BY HOUSE

OPPOSITION MOIES FAIL

After two divisions had been,,forced by the Opposition, the Standards Bill was put tflirough its remaining stages and pai\s>ed without amendment by thei House of Representatives last nifeht. Opposition members agreed with the principle of the Bill but -strongly opposed two of the clauses. They objected to the constitution of the Standards Council on the ground that those who would be stffected by the application of standards should have representation, and opposed the clause providing for regulations to enforce standard specifications.

The Minister of Industries andi-Com-merce (Mr. Sullivan) agreed that-those concerned should be represented and said that he would agree to accept nominations when the council was being set up. He would still exe:ccise the right to accept the nominations but in the normal course of events they would be accepted unless there vras some real justification for their rejection.

During the second reading debate members of the Opposition confined their remarks mainly to the compulsory clause and to the comment that.'; the Bill could have been left until after the war.

Mr. Sullivan said there was no suggestion that standards would mean universal sameness. Standards really meant the suitability and capacity for service of the articles concerned. Dealing with other points raised by the Opposition, he said that the Bill did not pioneer the field of compulsion, for in most other countries powers of compulsion were incorporated in regulations. It had also been a regular practice in the Dominion for appointments to be made by a Minister, and as for the suggestion that the Bill should not proceed during wartime he could quote high authorities to show that standards were required in wartime to a very much greater extent than in peacetime.

TO CHECK THE FEW,

Exhibits had been produced revealing very inadequate workmanship involving a danger to life and property. But because references had been made to manufacturers who did not play the game, it was very unfair of Opposition members to speak as though members on the Government side who had condemned bad workmanship were attacking New Zealand's manufacturers as a whole. Manufacturers themselves were keener in their criticism of people putting out that sort of work than any of the members of the House, and there were manufacturers today who would be very glad indeed to have compulsory standards to eliminate the shoddy work that was sometimes sent out by their competitors.

The Committee stages of the Bill were not prolonged. After a short debate on the clause setting up the Advisory Council the division was taken, the voting being 34 to 16. The "compulsory" clause voting was 32 to 17 in favour of the retention of the clause.

The Bill was passed,