WHAT HE WOULD DO

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22398, 20 October 1934, Page 5

WHAT HE WOULD DO

NEW ZEALAND DICTATOR MR DICKINSON’S VIEWS Systematic economic planning, the nationalisation of various services, local body reforms, and the diversification of industries were among measures advanced as suitable for application to New Zealand by Mr H. D. Dickinson, exchange lecturer from Leeds University, in an address given at Auckland last week under the auspices of the Workers’ Educational Mr Dickinson gave the first of a series of lectures arranged by the association on the subject of “Whither New Zealand? and (says the Auckland Star), in accordance with the programme, he presented the plans he would put into operation if he were made dictator of New Zealand for five years. Basing his arguments on the asanrap tion that the dictatorship would have the passive acquiescence of the popula tion, and would be non-revolutionary, Mr Dickinson said that at the outset it would be necessary to issue a proclamation on certain general principles. First it would have to be. stipulated that the resources of the whole country would be used to produce the greatest material welfare for its inhabitants. Then, for reasons of maximum efficiency and production, it would be necessary to overcome the existing right of ownership, but compensation would be given to those whose properties were appropriated. While there was work to be done, no one able and willing to work should be idle, but, if the amount of _ work to bn accomplished diminished, leisure should be shared more or less equally all round. MORE INDUSTRIES. That, said Mr Dickinson, indicated the general lines of his policy, but the actual steps to be, taken depended on an analysis of the economic situation. First he would want to know if New Zealand was suffering from over-expansion of its primary industries and placing too great a reliance on the export market. In'a way, New Zealand and Great Britain formed an interesting contrast, as they had both over-specialised, me in manufactures and the other in agricultural production. From this arose the question of developing other industries. There were three ways in which this could he brought about-—laissez faire, capitalist protectionism, and Socialist planning. Under the first they would simply allow low prices to bankrupt fanners or drive them off the land by low earnings. In

i the absence, of the Conciliation and Arbitration Acts, wages would be loveed ■down to the point at which manufacturers would find it worth while to expand existing industries or set up new ones. Under .protectionism it would be possible, by sufficiently high tariff and exchange, to keep up both, money wages and farmers’ money earnings at the expense of an extremely high cost of living. The effect of the two policies would be very much the same in the long run, but of the two the second would probably be less deflationary and probably deed#' panied by less unemployment. Both of them, however, were subject to the disadvantage that the contraction of agriculture and the expansion of industry would be chaotic, unplanned and accompanied by great material waste; —waste of resources and human hardship. LOWER STANDARD OP LIVING t It remained to be , seen whether it would be possible by deliberate planning of tlie economic life of the community to effect the transition. Even with the best precautions, however, there was a possibility that it would be difficult to maintain the high standard of- living of the last 20 years. There was also a possibility that there would be a fall in the standard of living due to diminishing productivity. Further, if the whole standard was to be maintained or surpassed, there was a necessity for the most economical use of productive resources. Air Dickinson next discussed the actual details of a scheme of economic planning, which, he suggested, was necessary under a dictatorship. He said that there would bo no need to nationalise everything straight away. The State should keep what was at present State-owned, but some things should be immediately nationalised —the harbours, road transport, possibly coastal shipping, and certainly banking and insurance. He would also suggest the immediate municipalisation of gas, water, and other local services that were not already under public ownership, with possibly extension to the retail sale of milk, bread, and other necessaries of life. In the absence of a well-developed consumers’ co-operative organisation in New Zealand, the municipalities would have to take over the functions which in England would be better performed by the co-operative societies. Then there would be a scheme of local body reform, the general idea being to have fewer local bodies covering a larger population. Undertakings which wpiild be nationalised or municipalised would he put under planning boards, which would have full powers to amalgamate or close down existing plants, review costs, receipts, profits, etc., of individual firms, allocate new capital to constituent concerns, and, in effect, replace the separate individual units of Capitalism by a public administration within glass walls.

PLANNING ORGANISATION. Speaking of the co-ordination of industry, Mr Dickinson said he would set up a national planning organisation the N.P.O.—which would he an organisation under a certain number of main divisions, with sections in each division. At present he had thought of these divisions as agriculture, industry, internal trade, foreign trade, finance, and general co-ordination. In each of the four divisions there would - be sections for different industries or branches of production, and existing State-owned undertakings—railways, power, etc.— would become operating boards under, the N.P.O. The divisions of internal and foreign trade would be organised in the same way under marketing boards. Division five, finance, would have the sections of national accounts corresponding to the existing Treasury, local body accounts, banking and investment, and capital supply. ’Finally, there would be'a supreme economic council, which would be the ultimate co-ordinating controlling body. This body would proceed to draw up a table of community needs and of the, total resources, and a provisional plan for production on the basis of using the existing resources for the maximum satisfaction and needs, and revivw the foreign situation. It would also answer freely questions:—What can New Zealand' export, and how much will the world take? How much in terms of import goods will New Zealand exports command on foreign markets, and what is the relative cost of imports and of New Zealand-made goods? From previous estimates and reviews the supreme economic council must determine what industries must be set up and expanded in New Zealand, and what output would be required from the chief export industries. It would be asked to set up appropriate planning or operating boards for these industries, giving each one a preliminary plan of capital construction output, etc. Then It would be requested to draw up schemes for the comprehensive deflation of in dustries that had been over-expanded. RATIONING PRODUCTION. It was this, said Mr Dickinson, that, if anything, would cause a dictator's downfall. If it turned out, on a review of the foreign trade situation, that New Zealand could no longer maintain witn advantage to the whole community the volume of exports of the past, various schemes could be suggested for rationing production. The difficulty was to reconcile the claims of humanity and efficiency. Mr Dickinson outlined possible solutions of this problem. Finally, the supreme economic council would have tlie task of supervising the distribution of national income, regulating wages rates and other social services so as to distribute to the whole population the right to consume the goods that were to be produced. It would also |

have to determine the division or tue national income between consumption and reinvestment and take steps, either by taxation or stimulating voluntary investment, to divert the desired portion of resources to the construction of capital for new industries. At the conclusion of his address Mr Dickinson was asked by a , member of the audience whether he had observed anything during his “ somewhat stormy sojourn” in New Zealand. He was asked to explain whether a Socialist plan could be constructed upon the. capitalist system. “There would not be much, of'capitalism left after my five-year plan,” stated Mr Dickinson. He proceeded to’ give a few of his impressions of New Zealanders, and he said he was led to;lnink they would be amenable to Socialist rule for several reasons. . The people were willing to try experiments, and New Zealanders, or, rather, some of them, did not have hidebound habits of mind. He thought there was a sufficiency of the experimental attitude for a plan such ns he suggested to receive a good beginning. “ I find your economists are free and unprejudiced—they have this attitude: Let’s try a little planning or a spot of Communism,” added Mr Dickinson.— (Laughter.) A voice: Anything but that. Mr Dickinson said that in various ways there was more chance of avoiding extreme class conflict in New • Zealand than in almost any other country he knew. Mr J. L. J. Wilson, who presided, expressed the regret of the Workers’ Educational Association at the forthcoming departure of Mr ‘Dickinson, .whose presence in New Zealand, he said, was a benefit of the exchange policy which perhaps Mr W. P. Endean, M.P., did not appreciate the significance. Mr Dickinson had been stimulating to the organisation and to Auckland. , Mr N. M. Richmond said that Mt Dickinson was not altogether the firebrand his newspaper reputation had made him, and the Government could do much worse than have hini as aa economic adviser.