INDUSTRIAL MISSION.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 26 August 1926, Page 7

INDUSTRIAL MISSION.

TO TH E UNITED STATES

AN AtUSTRIALJ AN PROPOSAL. SYDNEY, Aug. 5 The surprise announcement by the Prime Minister at the end of last week that the Federal Government bad decided to send to the United States a. party of Australian Industrialists representing botli employers and employees to study die reasons for the efficiency of American industry caused widely-div-vm se comment. The proposal is claimed by the Town and Country Union, a freetrade body, to have originated in J ts suggestion to M.r. Bruce last April to send such a. mission “to investigate and report upon the means and methods by which the people of America, have secured a larger share of general prosperity than that enjoyed by the people ol other countries.” The decision wa,s the subject of 'adverse comment by manufacturers in Sydney. The president of Hie local Chamber of Manufactures (Mr. S. F. Newlands) claimed that- the Prime Minister bad emphasised the inefficiency of Australian manufacturers, while neglecting the point that the ca.ti.se of the difference between Australian and Amor Lean rates of production was: the prevalence of pernicious doctrines resulting in a wrong attitude of mind and a law forbidding payment for output. They considered that efficiency could be obtained best by individual effort and research, observation, initiation, and experiment, in each separate industry. “One must look further atfield,” he added. “ to causes not necessarily to be found within the factory premises for America-ls prosperous industrial condition, to-day. These include >ai truly protective tariff, development of industries rapid enough'to absorb immigration on a large scale, a consequent increase of home consumption, transport facilities to decentralise plants, keen internal competition, and ample funds for research.” Oil the other 'band, the Employers’ Federation in Sydney heartily approved the proposal, .as did the Chamber ol Manufacturers and .Employers’ Federation in Melbourne and the other Sta.to capitals. Tile main view of the federation was that the mission’s best- results would come from an ilivestigotion of the reasons underlying the .reasons for the better 'relations between employers and employees, in preference to an inquiry into the causes of increased rates of production. Manufacturers in otlier States than New South Wales, while approving the Ministry’*, decision, ternpared that approval with the view.that, the mission would be worthless unless it were composed of the right men, who would enter into the inquiry with unprejudiced minds. Most (Labour organisations in the various State capitals endorsed the proposals, particularly if the unions were ■allowed to choose their own delegates, and if each State were represented, but •again. Sydney provided the voice of dlssention. The local Trades Hall opinion was strongly against the sending of the mission. “1 think it will be a very fine picnic, and the country will have the pleasure of footing the bill,” was the remark of one union secretary. This official summed up Sydney Labour opinion when he said: “Mr Bruce apparently does not realise that we know a great deal about America, and its methods of efficiency and speeding-up iiysteins. We can find out all we want by reading and from inquiries from our own people who have worked in America. We were always of opmio.ii that Mr. Bruce knew little about the manufactures of this country. The fact that he now wants to send somebody away to obtain, the information confirms' our view.” Another Sydney official declared that the only unionists who would support the scheme would be those who thought they had .an opportunity of being one of the party.