LICENSING OF INDUSTRY

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXXIII, 9 December 1940, Page 6

LICENSING OF INDUSTRY

REPLY TO CRITICISM STATEMENT BY MINISTER MISREPRESENTATIONS ALLEGED [United Press Association] WELLINGTON, This Day. “Though the Government is always ready to listen to all reasonable and constructive criticism of its administration and of the Orders-in-Council which may be published from time to time, unwarranted criticisms and misrepresentations such as have been contained in statements made by the past-president of the New Zealand Employers’ Federation and at the Canterbury Chamber of Commerce meeting last week, cannot be allowed to pass without challenge,” said the Minister of Industries and Commerce, the Hon. D. G. Sullivan, in a statement replying to criticism of the Licensed Industrial General Regulations, 1940. made by the chamber and by Mr Machin, president of the employers’ federation. “Because of the mis-statements of fact and of the lack of understanding of the regulations revealed by those whose remarks have been reported in the Press this week, it would be well to consider what the regulations provide for and what are their implications,” said Mr Sullivan. The regulations were general enabling regulations designed to facilitate the work of the Bureau of Industry in many routine matters, and also to provide a basis for the formulation of industrial plans under the Act in the most convenient form and with a minimum of delay. It should be emphasised that the regulations referred only to industries licensed under the Industrial Efficiency Act and to no others, and furthermore certain parts of the regulations referred only to industries that have voted in favour of an industrial plan prepared in accordance with the Act. LICENSING REQUESTED “The statement reported to have been made by Mr T. N. Gibbs at the Canterbury Chamber of Commerce is an absurd statement of the position. I have emphasised time and again that the procedure under the Industrial Efficiency Act provides the most democratic basis conceivable for the organisation of industry that exists today. The fact that representatives of such industries as the footwear industry, radio industry, . oap industry and many others have, through the New Zealand Manufacturers’ Federation, requested the licensing of their industries provides an eloquent refutation of the suggestions made at the Canterbury Chamber of Commerce meeting that there was an element of the sledge hammer and the steam Roller in the procedure being followed. “Not only have these industries sought the benefits of the Industrial Efficiency Act but they have also cooperated with the bureau in formulating provisional industrial plants for the re-organisation of their industries under the Act. Only this week a representative of the Bureau of Industry has discussed in the four main centres with footwear manufacturers the detailed provisions of their industrial plans and in each centre the general regulations have been discussed and their implications examined, and it is significant that manufacturers, though they have an opportunity in their plans to modify the general regulations. are quite satisfied with all the provisions of the general regulations. “Only yesterday representatives of the Bureau of Industry met a representative gathering of radio manufacturers in Wellington to discuss the •provisional plan for the radio industry, and I understand that, except for minor modifications of the regulations considered desirable in respect of the radio industry, the general regulations 'Will be quite acceptable to the radio Industry and will be embodied in their provisional plan. When I emphasise that before the publication of the regulations the New Zealand Manufacturers’ Federation had an opportunity of studying them and raised no . objections to them in their published form it will, I think, be clear that the criticism of the Chamber of Commerce and of Mr Machin where he refers to the regulations as the most flagrant piece of administrative lawlessness yet seen in New Zealand, seem to be sadly out of touch with the realities of the situation. “Surely those to whom the regulations apply are the ones most competent to express an opinion as to their effects and I would suggest that those who have rushed into print to condemn the regulations should ‘ study their wording more closely before making further statements calculated to disturb our industrial structure and bring disharmony into the industrial community.” APPLICATION OF REGULATIONS The Minister said that the part of the regulations relating to the powers and functions of industrial committees could apply only when an industrial committee was appointed to administer a plan under the Act, and before such a plan could be embodied in regulation it had to be approved by the industry. What could be fairer and more democratic than that? Another part of the regulations which had been referred to was the part which set out conditions implied on licenses issued under the Act unless the bureau otherwise decided, and also conditions which the bureau might impose if it thought in any particular case that the conditions were desirable. “In this regard,” said the Minister “the regulations in no way extend or enlarge the powers already given the bureau under the Industrial Efficiency Act, which has been in operation for the past four years. The conditions are merely listed in the regulations as a matter of convenience and in fact many of them have been imposed on licenses issued during the past few years. “No efficient industrialist could pos- j sibly take exception to the six condi- i tions which it is stated apply to all 1 licenses unless the bureau otherwise | decides, as these merely require the i licensee to do what an efficient industralist might be expected to do, having regard to the desirability for the utmost co-ordination and efficiency in the industry as a whole. The remaining conditions, which do not apply unless the bureau specifically imposes them, would only be enforced by the bureau where the circumstances of a particular case clearly warrant such action. “Under the regulations an industrial committee has power to recommend to the bureau what conditions of licenses should apply to its industry. Here again the regulations actually provide for the representatives of industries having a say in the conditions to be imposed on their licenses. The other parts of the regulations are for the most part of machinery nature, and are in no way calculated to impose obligations on industrialists in

licensed industries which are not reasonable and acceptable. The various fees are of a nominal amount only, and the annual levy which is provided is for the purpose of providing funds for the administration expense of the industrial committee. “Here again, the regulations provide that the moneys paid in by each industry are to be kept in separate accounts, so that those engaged in any licensed industry will be able to see from time to time how their moneys have been expended and the balance left in their account. This balance can be used only for the purposes related to the industry concerned. Here again I would emphasise that those industries which have been contacted about plans since the passing of the general regulations have agreed to the imposition of this levy. “As I said when the general regulations were published toward the end of October, there is the utmost need for maximum efficiency and coordination of industry throughout the Dominion, and the value of planning on a national basis by means of a selfgoverning industrial committee with the benefit of statutory powers offers a worth-while opportunity to our industrialists. The general regulations provide a basis for all industrial plans and are designed to facilitate discussions with industry and the early adoption of plans, and I am satisfied that, far from introducing a measure of dictatorial control as has been suggested in the Press this week, the organisation of industry along voluntary and co-operative lines will be greatly facilitated by the general [ regulations.”