EFFICIENCY ACT

Hokitika Guardian, 22 September 1937, Page 5

EFFICIENCY ACT

A STRONG DEFENCE BY HON. D. G. SULLIVAN. (Per Press Association-Copyright). WELLINGTON September 21. “This act is certainly one of the most democratic measures ever placed on the Statute Book of New Zealand,” said the Minister for Industries and Commerce (the Hon. D. G. Sullivan), when making a strong defence of the Industrial Eificiency Act, during the Address-in-Reply debate in the House of Representatives to-day. Mr Sullivan Jinked the allegations of encroachment on the .rights of private individuals made by the Leader of the Opposition (the Hon. Adam Hamilton), in his noconfidence amendment, with the work of the Bureau of Industry, but claimed that the actions of the bureau at no time had tended toward that.

“The Leader of the Opposition talked about the Government having encroached on the rights of private individuals in industry,,” Mr Sullivan said. “I do not know whether he had the Industrial Efficiency Act and the Bureau of Industry in mind. If he did, I want to say to him that in its structure, and its administration, that act is one of the most progressive and certainly one of the most democratic measures enacted in New Zealand, it is impossible to apply any plan for the control of an industry under that act without the consent of the majority of units in the indus try involved. With two of the plans we have dealt with, those lor the flax industry and the pharmacy industry, it was found that in both cases there waa disagreement with the initial plan od important points. New plans were hammered out, and referred to the industry. The flax plan, is already adopted and the other is'still under discussion; but what I have said should clearly indicate that all this talk oi bureaucratic. control of industry is the sheerest propaganda. I would have been pleased if the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues had been anfl quoted a specific case.” “What about housing and transport?” interjected Mr Hamilton. Mr Sullivan: The Government the Leader of the Opposition was associated with conducted a housing scheme* There was the example of North cote, at Christchurch, and incidentally one oS the biggest failures of its kind in the history of the Dominion. But if it is bureaucratic intervention for this Government to run a housing scheme, then it was for the last. Government.

Mr Sullivan claimed that the same thing could he said of transport. Thu last Government bought up transport systems, just as well as the -present Government did. “In fact, our difficulty is that there are so many industries anxious to get the benefit of the Industrial Efficiency Act, and seeking various forms of control,” Mr Sullivan said. “1 have a list of 20 industries iu front of me now, all of wfiiclij are asking for some control; but wo are not ready to respond to these requests, or at least to all of them. We want to move cautiously, so that w© will not make mistakes. It really does not become the Opposition to criticise u s on these grounds at all.”

Mr Sullivan said the Government was applying the principle of co-operation and consultation all along the lino Under the. Industrial Efficiency Act. Similar powers to those to which ho had referred were taken and used by the previous Government. This Government was proceeding along the lines of co-operation and democracy. It was unquestionable that control wag fully justified, provided it was exercised with judgment and discretion. It would, be possible to hold up the development of industry by the unwise exercise off the principles of licensing and control, but there was a great deal to he said for control and licensing with the qualification he had made.