“MADE IN NEW ZEALAND” WEEK

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21650, 21 May 1932, Page 14

“MADE IN NEW ZEALAND” WEEK

TO THE EDITOR. Sib, —Seeing that our primary producers of Otago have no one to champion their cause during these excessively difficult times, I feed that I must make some remarks in contradiction to all the splash and dash and statements of our Prime Minister and other public men concerning “ Made in New Zealand ” Week, many of wliich statements are used in the usual democratic way of unblushingly purchasing popularity at the expense of the State and, in consequence, should be accepted lightly by the public. Would these public men deny that the protective (Customs) system now in force has not contributed to lowering the selling price of our primary products overseas, and in consequence retarded the further development of our natural resources and raised prices in the Dominion? Arc they aM’are of this most important fact, Chat exports and imports must be balanced, that what protective tariffs are doing is to remove a considerable portion of the people from working the land —from tlie sunlight, from the healthy air and contact with Nature, and place them in stifling factories, wasting their strength in unhealthy occupations where they can hope to earn no more than a bare living? It is for this class of work our Prime Minister,' himself a fanner, appeals to the people for support so that the young people as they leave school may find employment. If these public men and manufacturers think that the future welfare and prosperity of this Dominion are to be found in the further development of our secondary industries, then they are hopelessly wrong and fail to understand or appreciate the wonderful gift which Nature has bestowed upon our fair land.

Mr Hogg is reported to have said during the Rotary Conference that on the field a sportsman would be ostracised who failed to play the game. This raises a point. Do our manufacturers play the game, when I tell you that New Zealandmade malt extract, shirts, pyjamas, and possibly other things are labelled and tagged “ British manufacture ”? One cannot say this is playing the game and there is no legitimate reason why these articles should be so branded. It clearly demonstrates to what a degree some of our manufacturers will hoodwink an already unsuspecting public and take the bread from the mouths of those workers in England to whom we are struggling to sell our butter, cheese, etc. Other manit facturera absolutely refuse to sell their goods unless they are resold at a fixed price to the public. I know of cases where, because one retailer refused to charge more than he was already charging for a certain article his supplies were cut off, because a larger retailer complained. While these people to-day ask us to buy their goods, they refuse to allow their manufactures to be sold in the field of open competition. Is this in the best • interests of the consumers, more especially of the wage earners?, _ _ I have carefully noted the prices of New Zealand-made goods on show, and after many years’ trading I am compelled to say the prices are not in keeping with the low cost of raw material and the times, I notice that one prominent manufacturer says that his raw material passes through 40 or 50 processes in course of manufacture. I reply that that has no hearing upon the cost or selling price of his goods at all, for have not the imported goods of a similar kind to pass through the same processes? Further, I must remind him that, when a few years ago after raw materials had advanced in price less than they, have fallen of late, prices were considerably advanced to the retailer and public, and when complaint was made we were told to look at the advanced price of raw materials. Their explanation was accepted, but now we are told that the cost of materials does not count so much as the cost of wages. There is no doubt in my mind that the high cost is due 'to excessive “ overhead,” costly buildings, and machinery and distribution, all of which must be written and brought down, not to mention that watered capital is expected still to earn its return. Is not the primary producer in as sorry a position? Unfortunately he cannot dictate the price which he will take for his goods, for he is compelled to sell them in the markets of the world in open competition. Yet our manufacturers are not able to heat the imported goods although these are handicapped by freight, duty, landing charges, etc. One manufacturer told me it was not his fault that the public had to pay so dearly for his goods—that it was the retailer who charged too much. I told him of the cases before-mentioned and he said, “ I know, but what can I do?” “Do the same as our primary producers do,” said I, and he did not answer me. Such being so, there is only one logical conclusion we can come to, and that is that most of the secondary industries in this Dominion are a direct charge upon every man, M-oman, and child in it. It appears to me that the manufacturers are “ making every post a winner,”, and that they are exacting every penny they can out of the pockets of the public, whilst the opportunity lasts. They_ cannot be blamed for so doing, for it is business, but I object to the manner they h,ave thought fit to go about it. Not only are they asking the people to pledge themselves to buy their goods, hut they are using the sorry plight of the unemployed as a reason why M r e should buy New Zealand-made goods. I for one will refuse to believe that we have in our midst a body of philanthropists in the nature of manufacturers. How many of these manufacturers made any reduction in their goods when the 10 per cent, reduction in wages took place? Hom’ many of them took on only an extra hand or two as the result of that cut? How many of them are not in combines with their selling prices ruling to-day the same as they were years ago when raw materials were much higher than they are at present? Believe me. Sir, the unemployment problem of this Dominion will not be solved or prosperity brought about by even the primary producers, let alone the manufacturers; It will be through the teeming millions of workers of Great Britain and those other countries that buy our produce, when they are happily and profitably employed again, and not till then.' —I am, etc., V. Langley. St. Kilda. May 19.