NEED FOR ACTION

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22539, 2 October 1936, Page 13

NEED FOR ACTION

ORGANISING INDUSTRY

CLAIMS BY MINISTER DEFECTS OF PRESENT SYSTEM BENEFITS FROM CONTROL 0 [BY TELEGRAPH —SPECIAL REPORTER] WELLINGTON, Thursday Various grounds in justification of the proposals for the regulation and control of industry outlined in the Industrial Efficiency Rill were advanced by the Minister of Industries and Commerce, the Hon. D. G. Sullivan, in moving the second reading of the bill in the House of Representatives to-day. Mr. Sullivan's speech was of almost heroic proportions, lasting as it did for two hours and 20 minutes.

Legislation of the type contained in the bill was vitally necessary, the Minister said. The manner in which several important industries had been allowed to languish or had become over capitalised was proof that a measure of control was required. A man acknowledged to be a leading figure in the coal industry had informed him that the system of company mining today was chaotic and that licensing was urgently required. The flax industry, which had once been flourishing, was not in a position to-day to meet insistent demands for fibre from other parts of the world and that was purely a result of lack of control in the past. Schemes in Other Countries "We owe it to future generations to take the necessary steps to protect our national assets," Mr. Sullivan contin uod. "I am hoping to rejuvenate the flax industry so that it will be able to play the part it ought to play in the economic development of the country.

"However, these are only illustrations. They can be multiplied time and again to prove that planning and control have been overlooked for years. It is only by control that we can prevent a repetition or a continuation of past mistakes." The principles embodied in the bill, the Minister said, wcro finding an increasingly wide application. Throughout the world different schemes of coordination, amalgamation and licensing were being employed and in one country, on account of over capitalisation in certain directions, it was stipulated that no new factories should be established. Great Britain was dealing with the question piecemeal, industry by industry, but schemes for the rationalisation and control of industry were in operation in the United States and numerous European countries. Manufacturers' Fair Attitude Mr. Sullivan said he had not been disappointed with the reception of the bill. Even the criticism of the newspapers had been somewhat restrained and their main request was for more time for a consideration of the measure. The attitude of the manufacturers generally had been quite fair. Highlyplaced officials of manufacturers' organisations had taken the view that the bill was desirable and that it should go 011 the Statute Book in the interests of manufacturing industries. Certainly the manufacturers were not unanimous and even those who supported the bill might not agree with some of the clauses. However, the bill was definitely wanted by the majority of organised manufacturers in New Zealand.

The lit. Hon. J. G. Coates (Opposition —Kaipara): But this bill covers more than manufacturers.

"That is so," replied the Minister, "but the main point is much wider than that. It is a question whether the law of free and cut-throat competition —the law of the jungle and the survival of the fittest —is to be the law of the future, or whether we are to have a law of common-sense civilisation with organisation on modern lines." There was an analogy between the position of industry to-day and the position of labour years ago, the Minister continued. With the advent of the machine labour in its widest sense became a disorganised rabble. Their salvation came through the organisation of unionism and the collective selling of labour. To-day the seller of goods was in difficulties. There was disorganisation due to a superfluous number of competing units. State Supervision Justified

"Already several industries in the Dominion have started on the task of preparing their own efficiency schemes," Mr. Sullivan said. "Some are well advanced. The opposite suggestions have been made that this legislation may result in a capitalistic monopoly, or a system of control by the workers. 1 admit that as far as the workers are concerned we are adopting a method which has not been adopted elsewhere.

"We are associating them with the preparation of industrial plans. We envision the co-operation of manufacturers, workers and consumers for the good of industry under the guidance of the State. If it is necessary for the State to grant tariff protection and subsidies to industry, surel> it is equally justifiable that the State should exercise some supervision over industrial development."