OPPOSITION HOSTILE

Grey River Argus, 11 March 1938, Page 9

OPPOSITION HOSTILE

TO IRON AND STEEL BILL Amendment Lost by 45 to 18 LATE SITTING OF HOUSE. [Per Press Association]. PARLIAMENT BLDGS., March 10. In the House of Representatives this afternoon, urgency* was granted on the motion of the Prime Minister (Rt. Hon. M. J. Savage), the passing of the Iron and Steel Industry Bill, the debate on the second reading of which was continued by Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates (Nat., Kaipara), who said that the Minister of Mines (Hon. P, C. Webb), had referred to the fact that past Liberal Governments had been favourably disposed towards State control of the iron and steel industry. This might be so, added Mr. Coates, but he would point out that, although these Liberal Governments had had ample opportunity for taking control, they had not done so. The plain fact was that the Government had made up its mind to socialise or communise the industry.

The Speaker (Hon. W. E. Barnard/, here intervened, stating that during the debate there had been too much reference to the question of State or private enterprise. In future, general references to this aspect of the debate would be ruled out of order as “tedious repetition.” COMPANY “ROOKS.” The Minister of Labour (Hon. H. T. Armstrong), said that every argument that could be used in favour of the socialisation of the hydro-electric and water supplies could be made to apply with equal force to the iron and steel industry. He continued that since 1914 we had been waiting for private enterprise to develop the industry, and all that had been done was to erect a “tin pot” shed at Onakaka, and raise a few thousand pounds. This could not possibly be successful. The Minister added, moreover, that thousands of people throughout the. Dominion had been “rooked” by company promoters, and all of the shareholders he knew, would have been only too glad to hand all their shares over to the Government, if the Government returned to them half the money they had invested. Mr.' W. J. Broadfoot (Nat., Waitomo), contended that there had been private capital available for tne development of the industry, but the Government had made up its mind that the industry should be controlled by the State. Members of the Opposition were just as anxious as was the Government that the resources of the country should be developed, but they differed on the method of that development, which they held, could better be done by private enterprise that by State control.

Mr. L. G. Lowry (Government, Otaki), said that he thought that Onakaka was the correct site for the newiron and steel works. If the industry were established there, and when it got fairly into its stride, it would make Onakaka the seventh port in the Dominion.

The debate was interrupted at 5.30 p.m. by the adjournment of the House.

The House continued the debate £ on the second reading of the Iron r and Steel Industry Bill when it re- s sumed at 7.30 p.m. f Mr. S. G. Holland (Nat., Christ- c church North), said that every right t thinking member of the House, in c fact everyone in the country, desired c to see the material resources of the E Dominion properly developed, and he t hoped to see the iron and steel in- f dustry developed on sound economic £ lines. He also hoped that whether 5 it was established, either under pri- < vate enterprise or under State control, that it would be a thorough sue- c cess. However, he added, he had no ( confidence whatever in the develop- < ment of the industry under State control. Referring to the operation of the proposed industry, Mr. Holland 1 said that the Minister’s proposals E were that the most easily made goods should be manufactured in New Zea- ■ land. If that were done, would com- I peting manufacturers be prepared to 1 supply the Dominion’s requirements < in other articles? ( NEW ZEALAND FOR NEW ZEALANDERS. . I Mr. J. A. Lee (Govt., Grey Lynn), j said that the Opposition was arguing that every country on earth was to be allowed to supply New Zealanders with iron and steel except New Zealand. He asked why New Zealanders should be denied the right to develop the large deposits of raw material in the country. He was a New Zealander, and a Socialist. New 1 Zealand had unrivalled resources. It i had more electrical energy and iron • ore than any other country in the : Pacific, and those who nad faith in the future of the country should be , prepared to develop those resources. Mr. H. Atmore (Ind., Nelson), said that the measure concerned the third largest deposit of iron ore in the , world, and he held that the deposit should be developed by the State in: the National interest. He did not ap-1 prove of the handing over of the. petroleum industry, lor instance, to private interests, and considering the importance of oil and iron in the piesent economy of nations, he considered that the State should undertake the development of both industries as well as others of similar consequence. AMPLE INTERNAL MARKET. Mr C. Morgan Williams (Govt., Kaiapoi) contended that there was an ample market in New Zealand for the products of the plant it was proposed to establish, and he regarded as a fallacy the claim that the industry could not prove successful unless export business were contemplated. Mr S. G. Smith (Nat., New Ply ■ mouth) said that the methods adopt- ' ed by the Government in its anxiety ■ to do something for the industry, would be a complete failure, and no future Government would be able to tackle it, while private enterprise would not be able to take it up. NATIONALIST AMENDMENT. The debate was continued by Messrs H. G. Dickie (Nat., Patea), H. S. S. Kyle (Nat., Riccarton) and W. _ P. Endean (Nat., Parnell). ! Mr Endean moved an amendment ! that the Bill be referred back to the I Government for further, and more complete investigation, by an inde-

pendent authority, also to make available all information relating to the Government’s proposal to spend £5,000,000 on the industry, and to explore further the possibilities of the industry being established by private enterprise. The amendment was defeated on a division by 45 votes to 18, and the Minister of Industries of Commerce (Hon. D. G. Sullivan) was replying to' the debate at midnight when the House was still sitting.

The Health Scheme MR HAMILTON’S VIEWS. WELLINGTON, March 10. The Prime Minister’s motion, setting up a select committee for investigation into the national health service and also the national superannuation scheme, passed the House of Representatives without comment, either from the mover or the Oppositionists. This smooth passage of an important resolution was due to the Government consulting the Leader of the Opposition requesting his party to nominate three representatives. [Messrs Cobbe, Kyle and Holland being chosen. A similar course was taken with the small group of Independents, who selected Mr Atmore. “Both are desirable objects, and there was no need to discuss the setting up of the committee, remarked Mr Hamilton, Leader of the Opposition, when interviewed after the resolution had been adopted. “There is certainly need for a full investigation for ramifications of the proposal extend over a wide area, covering the hospital system, medical profession, friendly societies, and everything is bound up with finance.” "It is anticipated that the committee will be asked to formulate a scheme?” Mr Hamilton was asked. “Labour critics used to criticise other Governments of endeavour to find policy in this way,” he answered, “and they are now doing it themselves. They will very likely find after full investigation, that our present system of almost free hospitals and non-contributory pensions are well abreast of the times. The Prime Minister says our health system is not up-to-date, but he might find our hospital system well ahead of other countries, where hospitals have to be maintained by public benevolence. I think the inquiry will show we are not far behind, either in superannu- * ation or health, if behind at all. How- ; ever, the investigation will present ! the position in true perspective, show- * ing what it would cost to improve it.