The New Zealand Times WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1925. NO CASE FOR ABSOLUTE CONTROL

New Zealand Times, Volume LII, Issue 12315, 9 December 1925, Page 6

The New Zealand Times WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1925. NO CASE FOR ABSOLUTE CONTROL

One of the first important principles enunciatetj by Mr Coates on his becoming Prime Minister was “more business infe Government and less Government in business.” , . ,

That is a wise saying. He himself has proved the verity of it. The Government has interfered in business in the past, with the quite expected untoward results. The explanation is simple. Big Business is Big Business, and continues to be what it is, for the sole and simple reason that it knows its job thoroughly, inside and out. There never was a Government competent to instruct it to advantage.

That is axiomatic; the lesson of history emphasised time and again. Yet, unless the Prime Minister intervenes, a body of nonexperts is to be allowed to assume absolute control of the destinies' of one of the vital industries of the Dominion: an industry worth £20,000,000 per annum. The “Times,” for one, will not allow absolute control to become a reality without a fight. The principle is wrong. It is also at variance with the Prime Minister’s own original declaration. It represents dictation by one small section over all the other sections interested. It is an attempt on the part of people of no proved competence m the marketing of dairy produce to arrogate to themselves that tremendous and intricate responsibility. The chairman of the Dairy Export Control Board blundered consciously or innocently in the statement given to the “Times” yesterday. He used the slump in the overseas butter market as an illustration of the necessity of absolute control. Perhaps “misused would be the fitter word. As is pointed out in our news columns to-day, Mr Grounds was guilty of several inaccuracies with which to Roister up his cause. He talked about the necessity of maintaining an even market price. That has not been accomplished even by. the Danes: Weddel’s chart is proof on this point. If, then, an even price is impossible, the case for absolute control receives a heavy blow. Again, contrary,to the assertion, or implication, of Mr Grounds, Denmark has no such policy as that the D.E.C.8., nor has Australia. The Australian form of control is along the lines of our Meat Con-, trol Board; that is, there is no interference With marketing. If Mr Grounds does not know these things, his ignorance is but another damaging argument against absolute control. If he goes to Tooley Street so indifferently armed, he and his board will be an easy prev for the enemy.. /

If Mr Grounds has stumbled into a quicksand as described his fellow-champion of absolute control, Mr Goodfellow, has not been less unfortunate. Evidence to that end will be found elsewhere. So far as the facts can be ascertained, the failure of the board to regulate shipments has been responsible for the congestion of cargoes; it was not the fault of the strike. The Meat Control Board has unmistakably justified its existence primarily, if not wholly, because it -has concentrated on the .regulation of shipments. Why another board should be granted extraordinary powers withheld from the M.C.B. is beyond understanding. J ■