N.Z. BUSINESSMEN

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXII, Issue 268, 27 October 1932, Page 7

N.Z. BUSINESSMEN

CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE ANNUAL CONFERENCE AT DUNEDIN. VARIOUS QUESTIONS DISCUSSED. By Telegraph—Press Association. Dunedin, Oct. 27. The Deputy Mayor, Mr F. W. Mitchell, in, the absence of the Mayor, welcomed the delegates to the annual meeting of the Associated Chambers of Commerce, which commenced this morning. He said that theirs was really the business men’s parliament of New Zealand. The difference between the two parliaments was that one was made up of all talk and very little work; with the chamber’s parliament it was very little talk and a great deal of work. Mr W. Machin, president, replying, said that in the present economic condition of the Dominion they should not allow the value of men to be subordinate to the value of the gold machine. He welcomed Mr H. H. Sterling to the conference and congratulated him and the Railways Board on the businesslike statement recently issued, and on the board’s attempt to reduce overhead expenditure to meet reduced revenue. Mr Machin read cablegrams from the Federation of Chambers of the British Empire asking that the proposed visit of delegates to New Zealand next year be postponed for three years. The request was agreed to. PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS. The first remit (a reaffirmation) was presented by the executive of the Canterbury Chamber. It urged the Government to agree that all future construction work for the Public Works Department be carried out by contract through public tenders, and that the department be reconstituted so as to make it purely an advisory and supervisory body in connection with these works. Mr Stronach Paterson said that there seemed a likelihood of at last getting somewhere with this remit. It had been supported by the National Expenditure Commission. The remit was carried with practically no discussions. GOVERNMENT TRADING PROTECTION. Mr A. F. Wright moved the reaffirmation of a remit protesting against the Government trading ventures being accorded the protection of the Crown Suits Act and asking that the Crown, where it is a litigant in respect of trading ventures, should be bound by the same rules and laws as operate between subject and subject. t Mr Wright said that the remit had been before annual meetings on many previous occasions. Eminent judges had spoken against the existing system. The speaker quoted cases in New Zealand where claims for priority under the Royal prerogative had been put forward. He said that the position was a grotesque anomaly and an absurdity. The remit was adopted. PREVIOUS DECISIONS REITERATED. The conference reiterated previous decisions urging that land fax be abolished and income tax substituted, and expressed appreciation of the intention of the Government to place a modernised Companies Act on the Statute Book during the current session of Parliament. The conference hefd that the operation of the Unemployment Act, 1930, and the amended Acts of 1931 and 1932 should relieve local bodies of the responsibility of providing for the relief of unemployment. Approval was gi.ven to the remit that the time had arrived when there should be a reduction in the number of members of Parliament. Mr Machin said there was a strong hint that appointments to the Upper House would be made on the new principle of future service rather than past service. The conference approved of a new remit that the Government should delay no longer in setting up the promised commission to inquire into the whole system of local body administration. It was stated that there were 600 local bodies, which had borrowed £72,000,000 and that this was sufficient evidence of the need for the commission. COMMISSION’S REPORT. Some discussion took place on the remit which welcomed the second report of tfie National Expenditure Commission and it was hoped that the Government would at once take steps to carry out its recommendations. Mr Stronach Patterson said that the report was the finest thing of its kind that had been produced in this country. He did not suggest that every recommendation should immediately be put into force, but if the Government neglected any > recommendation it should justify its neglect. “If we neglect to support the commissioe,” said Mr. Machin, “we Will lose the finest opportunity we could possibly have hoped for and waste the work of the chambers over many years. It is a wonderful report.” AMENDMENT MOVED. Mr Paterson moved as an amendment: “That this conference urges on the Government that if it decides that any of the recommendations of the commission cannot be given effect to such recommendations be referred back for a further report.” Mr Wright said that the commission had made its report and was dead. If the amendment were passed the commission would have to be reconstituted. Mr D.'Ruttledge (Invercargill) said he thought that where a Government department was paying it should not be interfered with. The commission recommended that the Lands and Deeds Department should be transferred from Invercargill to Dunedin, but it was paying. Mr Machin: A very happy position. Mr A. F. Wright said that the commission recommended that the departments of Lands and Deeds and Stamps should he confined to the four centres. There was to be a saving by the transfer of £6,000 The speaker deprecated bringing in sectional interests. Mr P. O. Sinellie said that the report should be the book of words for every chambe*»>f commerce.

The remit was adopted with the addition of the amendment moved by

Mr Paterson. The addition was altered to read, “but that no recommendation from the commission lie disregarded without being deferred back to the same commission for a further report.”