SUBSIDISING INDUSTRY

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21911, 21 September 1934, Page 12

SUBSIDISING INDUSTRY

MAKING FRUIT-CASES

GRANT TO NELSON OPPOSED BUSINESS MEN'S ATTITUDE Further protest against the proposal of tlie Unemployment Board to subsidise new industries to the extent of £230.000 was made at a meeting of the council of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce yesterday■

Specific complaint was made by Mr. Harvey Turner against the proposals to subsidise makers of fruit-cases in the Nelson district. He was not opposed to assistance being given to fruitgrowers, but it should not be confined to- one section of them, at the expense of others. "Similar practices have been adopted previously bv the Government," he added. Some -years ago Southern jam manufacturers were given sugar at the same price as Auckland, where the refinery happened to be situated.

"This question of fruit-cases is only one example of where abuses can creep into the board's industry subsidy scheme," said Mr. G. Jackson. An explanation of the situation aj> Nelson was given in a letter from Mr. A. Seed, secretary of the New Zealand Boxmakers' Association. The high transport cost in New Zealand caused Nelson cases to be slightly higher in cost than were those available from plantation areas closer to the actual fruitgrowing districts. In the second place, imported fruit-cases were landed direct at Nelson without local transport costs, which other fruitgrowing districts had to pay. In reply to the council's general protest agairust the subsidy proposal, the acting-Minister of Employment, the Hon. J. A. Young, stated that the granting of assistance to approved industries, especially of a non-competitive nature, would result in the unemployed being absorbed in normal industry, and thus become self-supporting and independent of further assistance from the board. "In the event of this result being attained, it might be practicable to make a further reduction in unemployment taxation," the Minister added. The letter was received. It W3B decided to take no further action in the matter of the Nelson fruit-case subsidy, it being considered that it now rested with the trade to take any further steps.