COST OF LIVING.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17285, 28 September 1916, Page 5

COST OF LIVING.

VALUELESS REGULATIONS

CITY COUNCIL DISCURSIVE.

WHAT IS A MONOPOLY? A letter from the Minister of Internal Affairs, inviting the City Council to at>ply for the powers offered under tho cost of living regulations, caused; a lively discussion in the City Council last night, in which a- strong feeling was expressed in favour of municipal trading. The Mayor said that the committee on the subject had asked that the evidence taken by the Cost of Living Commission should be made available to the council. He thought that the regulations were starting at the -wrong end, and something should first be done to keep the prices down at the other end. From information in his possession, he was satisfied that the retailers were not making a very fat living. They were charged high, and had to charge mg’' to their customers. The Mayor added that the committee would remain inexistence and do what it could. Councillor A. S. Taylor said that in the House of Parliament some of the boroughs had been castigated for not taking advantage of tile regulations which proposed to provide tor milk stations, and the distribution of milk; fish trawlers and retail fish supplies, city bakers and so on. In none of these cases was tho council given a monopoly, and without it the thing fell to the ground.. , . ~ “You have no right to have it, said Councillor H. J. Otley. Councillor Taylor suggested that the Minister should be informed that any regulations that could bo framed would be result-less. He moved that, owing to the faulty legislation underlying the matter no regulations could be of any use to the council. Councillor D. G. Sullivan, in seconding the motion, said that the city should detail the points in which the legislation was deficient. Councillor Otley said that he had never heard two sillier speeches in ma life. There would be no success in life without competition, but the council was not prepared to go into business

without the door closed to all competitors. At present a man could sell at any price The Mayor: You cannot do it now. It is all rings. Councillor Otley said that at present Christchurch had as cheap fish as could be found anywhere, ■without any bolstering up from tho city’s rates. He supposed that a city milk supply would cut out every small man. He had every sympathy with the men who got up early, milked their cows, and then hawked milk. The city would sell at what price it liked. The municipality should welcome all the competition possible.

“What about your trams and trains?” asked Councillor Sullivan. Councillor J. 0. Jameson said that tho advocates of monopoly should turn to tho State coal mines, which were run at a loss, while coal was dearer than over. Neijjjicr did ho think that State fire insurance had justified its existence. He moved an amendment that tho Board of Trade Committee should.bo asked to report on the letCouncillor W. H. Cooper seconded the amendment. Councillor J. M’Combs said that the council should bo consistent, for in 1913 and 1914 it had sought power from Parliament to secure a monopoly of tho sale of giillc in the city. The power, however, had not been granted, but an emasculated Bill had been placed on the Statute Book, and it was from this Bill, which was valueless

to the council except as a stepping stono to better things, the Minister had drawn his regulations. It was a misuse of the term monopoly when the customers in their own interests sought to control a public necessity. He was in favour of the motion, for the council was bound to explain to the public that the powers offered by tne regulations were valueless. Councillor J. Reynolds said that there was ample room for municipalising sertain services, notably the milk supply, in which enormous distributive costs could bo avoided. Councillor J. M’Cullougli said that the large number of _ carts running about the city soiling milk and, as was frequently proved in the Courts, water, was an ample argument in favour of a city monopoly which would do good if only it provided that the people got what they were paying for. He had never heard any objection to State railways or fire insurance. He would even urge that the council should compote with other retailers. He had seen five prices that day for electrical work, and the City Council’s price was the lowest. As for milk, it was a disgrace that any working man should have to pay 5d a quart for milk which the police records showed' was very often half water. . . Councillor Otloy said that he had never seen any milk that had water in it

‘ Tt is caused by competition,” said Conneilior M’Cullough. Councillor Otley replied that the cost of feed had entailed a. rise in milk. It was r false to say that distributing costs were high, and Christchurch had a pure milk supply. It would be a hardship to cut out the small man who had a few acrr.s.

“Wo would buy his milk,” said the Mayor. “ His distributing is dono at a loss.” Councillor Taylor said that Councillor Otley : s arguments were mainly beside the point. It had been found that trams and electricity were things that could be profitably monopolised. The council desired merely to carry the principle n step further, and monopolise milk, fish and baking. To-day he city had reached the point where the distribution of milk and bvead could bo undertaken advantageously. “ Why is it,” asked Councillor Otley, “ that Wellington, with a municipal milk supply, charged 6d a quart last year?” “It is not a municipal supply,” replied several councillors. The Mayor said that he had been assured that one man on the average baker’s cart could not deliver mors than 700 loaves a week, at a cost of £3 8s 6d, which was 1.03 d per loaf. The City Council could very easily distribute this bread much more cheaply. The motion was carried 1 on tho voices.