The Grey River Argus TUESDAY, April 28, 1942. LABOUR AND THE WAR.

Grey River Argus, 28 April 1942, Page 4

The Grey River Argus TUESDAY, April 28, 1942. LABOUR AND THE WAR.

More than once since the start of the war, proposals macle by the President of the United States regarding the economic and industrial aspects of operations have indicated a familiarity on. his part with measures already being operated in New Zealand. His latest message to Congress is expected to deal with the cost of living, that concept being preferred by him to the idea of control of inflation. Inevitably this war, probably in a greater degree than the last war, will modify industrial policy in every belligerent country, and exert in this respect a lasting influence for the future. In Britain during the past two years, organised Labour has obtained representation on the Production Councils, and now the Miners’ Federation has gone a step further in proposing for ■ adoption by the Government a scheme for a National Coal Board, representing the workers, mine owners and the State, and exercising absolute control over the disposition of labour in the coal industry. The Federation, as one inducement for acceptance of its plan, indicates that, output could thereby be raised to the amount aimed at, or by three hundred thousand tons weekly. New Zealand may have in its Coal Council the nucleus of a. similar innovation. It is an undeniable fact that our war ■effort, in many of its economic, and industrial aspects, has been greatly facilitated by measures, introduced before the war by the present Government, with the result that nacessary adaptations have been possible without anything like the dislocation experienced in various

other countries. The (!iiiui<li<i>i Congress of,Labour, through Jis Executive, is now <|oini)iH.|irig that the Government hliiill Mill up Industrial Plant ('oiineiln representing the workers, the employ-, ers and. the State, lltiii being deemed advisable to vmmre tlmt xvar production shall be main" tained without interruption, and that industry shall he. eondncted harmoniously now, and con vari - ed after the war to pciice-time production the more expeditiously. If the stress ol‘ war should serve to demai’cate more clearly lhe classes of industry which should remain, as they already have become subject to much increased State direction, it will in that respect at least have been educative. That Britain’s new Minister of Production, Mr. Lyttelton, has been giving these questions his attention, is shown by his latest broadcast, in which, recalling that he has been himself a capitalist, he declared tlmt after the war there must not only be a great deal more of free enterprise but also a great deal more pf Government plai - ning or Socialism in that sense. Making the reservation that risks in many enterprises were such that private rather than State initiative was better fitted to undertake them, he said in effect that the risk of unemployment had to be eliminated and that capital equipment , had to be moderated. Stressing the latter, contention, he declared Britain could, be rendered the happier and freer from unemployment in the degree she attained the objective of moderating capital equipment. It could have been wished that the Minister had been rather more explicit. If he meant that planning would mean a reversal of the process of monopolistic capitalism, it is an important utterance as coming from such an official source. Mr. Lyttelton, knowing how the State at present exercises its initiative, acknowledged it must continue this ion whatever scale the country’s assets, services and amenities dictate. A working partnership in industry, from which the drones shall be eliminated, is a formula that would carry reconstruction a long way. Jt implies that the workers shall have a definite and effective influence upon the conditions of their industry, and a share in the proceeds proportionate to their contribution in production. In the United States the operators, while generally readyU>o pay on a bettor basis than in most other countries, have been more adamant than other employers in their dictatorship 'over conditions. The war is now manifestly curtailing their .scope in this respect, and the latest attempts to share out contracts among smaller units and thus somewhat to decentralise industry, are a testimony to the necessity of some afternative to undiluted capitalistic control, and of the workers being brought into. a. large share of power in shaping their industrial environment. The final consideration is not simply that of maximum output, whereby workers are regarded as merely adjucts to machinery. It is rather the restoration of the human factor in actual production to its rightful place as that .of the master. In the degree that the war, not merely in production, but in military activity. may demonstrate the • importance of humane personality, it is reveaHng a silver lining in ; a cloud that otherwise is extremely dark.