THE H. B. TRIBUNE MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1964 AN UNSATISFYING REPORT.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXIV, Issue 235, 17 September 1934, Page 6

THE H. B. TRIBUNE MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1964 AN UNSATISFYING REPORT.

Last February the Government set up a committee consisting of eleven members of the House of Representatives “to inquire into the monetary systems or standards which have been advocated as preferable to our present system.” This Monetary Committee, as it is styled, after devoting months to their investigation, involving the taking of much oral and written evidence, presented a report which was tabled last week. It is a portentous looking document, running into close on a hundred closely printed foolscap pages, which arc accompanied by some 700 pages setting out evidence given. In a question of this kind the first thing to consider is the competence of those chosen to deal with it, and it would certainly be a generous concession to the financial ability of our M.P.’s to think that among them, and outside Cabinet, there are half a score qualified to wrestle with so technical and complex a subject.

More especially is this the ease when we find that the Committee

"as instructed to "have regard to tlie nature of the trade and in-

dustry of the Dominion, our economic relationship with Great Britain, with other parts of the British Empire and with foreign countries, and generally to all other relevant factors.” This was a fairly big order'to submit to these eleven private members, of whom only Iwo or three at the outside can be considered as likely to be able to bring any intimate study of the subject 1.0 hear upon their conclusions. Having regard to the wide spread of the instructions, there was never a case in which expert knowledge was more essential. That was just the qualification that was most obviously lacking with the great majority of the Committee, a comment that may be made without in any way detracting from their general uselulncss as parliamentary representatives of the people. However, the Committee has evidently struggled earnestly and valiantly with the intricate problem and have submitted a report couched very largely in technical language that savours of a good deal of hasty reading-up of standard and other authorities. Possibly, of course, some of it was captured from those who tendered evidence. In any event, the report is in the main of a negative character, and where otherwise has been pretty well anticipated by action taken by the Government either before or while the Committee was in session.

Having said all this, it may also be said that the Committee has shown good judgment in emphasising the fact that all our woes are not, as some would have us believe, attributable solely to a faulty monetary system. Many of us cannot but be impressed that the system should be capable of advantageous readjustments, but I here are not a great number who can see a betterment of conditions as likely to be achieved by the more radical changes advocated in some quarters and to some extent adopted by a dissenting minority of the Committee. It is worth noting that Mr. Downie Stewart, probably l he most

capable member of the Committee, shows himself quite unable to subscribe to the findings of the majority and appends to their report a personal memorandum of his own. In this we have, in effect, a very keen criticism of the vagueness and inconsistencies of the report, which he characterises as having failed to fulfil the specific purposes for which the Committee was instituted. This is a conclusion with which most will agree after reading the report and what he has to say about it. His complaint is that, with all its length and diffuseness, it does not, in the end, give any definite and intelligible answers to the real questions at issue. Giving what credit we may for the good intentions of the Committee, and of the Government in setting it up, it can scarcely be said that its report provides any really appreciable contribution to the solution of our current economic problems.