The Evening Star SATURDAY, AUGUST 16, 1924. THE TIMBER COMBINE.

Evening Star, Issue 18714, 16 August 1924, Page 6

The Evening Star SATURDAY, AUGUST 16, 1924. THE TIMBER COMBINE.

Parliament has made a good beginning on consideration of the Estimates. There is another class of estimates which has boon causing a great deal of worry and comment among those whom Parliament represents. We refer to builders’ estimates. These were involved in the first matter brought up for debate in the House yesterday. Mr Wilford asked the Prime Minister to do something which would bring the price of timber within roach of those desirous of building homes. Ho complained of the existence of a combine practically exercising a monopoly in the marketing of timber, and quoted a rase showing how big n “ cut ” in prices conld ho obtained if a customer had direct access to the mill. With the somewhat vague statement that “the Government was out after exploiting combines as much as anyone.” Mr Massey promised to investigate the ease, quoted b} r Mr Wilford. and thereafter the spokesman on behalf of flic Government wan Mr Downie Stewart. It was an unsatisfactory kind of discussion so far as the -house-hungry people arc concerned. They know how the price of timber compares with what it was in the not very distant past, and they also know that the Government has at its own request been granted by Parliament certain specified powers to prevent exploitation, besides other indefinite powers which it may create for itself and define and exorcise by regulations issued under Order in Council. The logical inference is that the Government ban the power but not the- will to prevent exploitation. The Government’s reply ic that it has the will but not the power to prevent it.

Several preventive methods were suggested during the debate yesterday. Mr Wilford’s advocacy of prosecution of the timber eombine—t-ho existence of which seems to be so well recognised as to he taken as a matter beyond argument —followed, a.s it was. by Mr Downie •Stewart's mention of the fart that the Crown is at present taking legal proceedings against the flour-millers, makes it evident that there was some idea that the Commercial Trusts Act might ho utilised to break up the timber combine. It cannot he so used. It does not apply to that industry. Part of clause 2in the Commercial Trusts Act states : “ Nothing in this Act shall apply to any goods other than those specified in tho schedule hereto,” and the goods set forth in the schedule are:—Agricultural implements; coal; meat; fish; flour, oatmeal, and their bv-prnchicts; petroleum or other mineral oil: sugar ; and tobacco. This legislation was passed in 1910, and the schedule has since been enlarged to comprise any article of food for human consumption. Nevertheless, the title of the Act—“ An Act for the Repression of Monopolies in Trade or Commerce” —is a misnomer. It may lie an Act for the repression of monopolies in specially selected branch.es of trade ami commerce, but, even ns regards those branches, it has mostly been treated as a dead letter.

After an interval of five years, during which there had been a change of Government, Parliament passed the “Cost of Living 1 Act,” its purpose being “to set np a Board of Trade and to make provision for tho regulation' of trade.” It specified one of tho duties of the Board of Trade as “ to inquire into and report to the Governor upon any complaint that the price of any class of goods is unreasonably high.” Tn virtue of his holding tho portfolio of Industries and Commerce, Mr Downie Stewart is President of the Board of Trade. The outstanding performance of the Board of Trade in its grappling with the cost of living has been price-fixing. Mr Stewart has evidently no higher opinion of this ae a remedy than has the general public. For he stated last night that “ there was a danger in fixing tho prices of timber that they would create a still stronger combine in trying to intervene where there appeared to ho exploitation. One had to take care not to intensify the position. When the prices wore fixed in Australia the. result had been a general rise in the cost.” This is the most scathing condemnation of the Board of Trade that, we have yet come across. Yet who is there that k prepared to contradict it? Mr Forbes, after listening to Mr Stewart’s confession of the Crown’s difficulties in suppressing exploitation, was perfectly justified in stating that it was quite evident that the Minister despaired of dealing witli monopolies and trusts except by State competition. There are some who think this remedy worse than the disease. They are able to produce corroborative evidence from the result of certain State competitive enterprises in Australia. It is true that many of these have failed lamentably. It is also true that some of them have been successful. If we look to our own experiments, we may take tho State Coal Department as dealing with a commodity quite comparable with timber. Has the putting of State coal on the market had any appreciable effect on the price of coal ? We are afraid that, if any deduction can be drawn, it is that timber would bo just as dear if the Slate became a competitive dealer in it as it is now. If price-fixing tends, in Mr Stewart’s experience, to hardening up the “ ring ” concerned, it is extremely probable tha.t tho intrusion of tho State as a competitor would have an exactly similar effect. The slogan of “less government in business and more business in government ” is a very good one, not mainly on account of business or government, but on account of the people. It is one business of the Government to see that the legislation for which 'it is responsible achieves its aim. Mr Stewart admits that the anti-trust legislation on tho Statute Book k inoperative in practice. Ho says there are so many “ gentlemen’s agreements ” in existence that it is impossible to get the proof necessary to secure a conviction. Mr Wilford, also a lawyer, seems to he in doubt whether the existing legislation is inefficient, for ho advocates the initiation of a prosecution of the timber combine under the present law, and he also urges the Government to bring down • legklation h deal with “this monopoly which is exploiting the people.” This latter would be the real test of the Government’s genuine desire to suppress monopoly. It haa been professed often. enough; but actions speak louder than words.