Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 15th., 1932. CONTROL OF “COMBINES.”

Greymouth Evening Star, 15 October 1932, Page 6

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 15th., 1932. CONTROL OF “COMBINES.”

*yU E average man may well be excused for feeling a bit bewildered by the remedies propounded by experts of varying qualifications to overcome the economic slump. Clear as these cures may be to their propounders, they appear muddled to the layman, who, in many instances, regards the prescription aS worse than the disease. However, he confesses his ignorance of the 'working of the systems of world economics, credit, currency, and finance, his chief fear being that whatever happens, he will benefit little. One of his I

chief puzzles is over the simultaneous raising of price levels and the lowering of the costs of production. The latter often means reduction in wages, to compensate for which he is told that the cost of living will fall. How this is reconciled with the campaign to increase price levels he fails to understand, if hoping for the best. Low and high may be relative terms, and perhaps some economic magician may be able to contrive that whilst everyone gets more for what he produces, the cost of production will at the same time decrease. Mass production certainly lowers costs, hut has, hitherto, failed to guarantee continuous markets.

In this mood, the layman is apt to be suspicious, and particularly of anything in the nature of a trust, or combine, whose chief aim, he thinks, is to raise price-levels to him, unduly. Thus, there will be much support in the Dominion for the strong attitude adopted by Mr. Forbes and Mr. Masters, on Thursday, in replying to a deputation at Wellington, which urged the repeal of certain legislation governing the operations of commercial combines and price-fixing agreements. There was nothing undecided about v the Ministerial “No,” the duty of safeguarding the general public being made the first consideration. There are probably anomalies arising under the Acts’ working, but the general effect of the legislation has been of great benefit to the nation. Some, indeed, think that the control could be increased without injustice being done. Mr. Coates, in his speech on the Ottawa agreement, referred to the gap between wholesale and retail prices; thus, the manufacturers’ quarrel, if any, is not with the public. Nothing more adds to the cost of living than, the lack of adequate competition. New Zealanders have paid heavily in the past through “understandings” and trade agreements. In the , more prosperous days, the question was not so acute, but now when incomes and earnings are low r er, it is essential to get full value for money. This has been recognised by many retailers, and, to-day the general public is on a much better footing. Were the present legislative protection weakened, or demands granted to prevent price-cutting, or to restrict the sale of certain goods to certain establishments, price levels would rise, the few benefiting at the expense of the many. All will agree that the wholesaler and retailer are entitled to a reasonable return on their ventures, and few would claim there is no scope for minor regulations to hinder what some regard as unfair trading. On general principles, however, Mr. Forbes and his colleagues are right in the attitude they are adopting. Vested interests should rely on their own enterprise and industry to meet trading rivalryj, rather than combine to uphold easy profits for themselves.