A COUNCIL OF PRODUCTION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22399, 22 October 1934, Page 6

A COUNCIL OF PRODUCTION

The objection which the Dairy Export Control Board has offered to the establishment of a Council of Trade and Production, as recommended by the Dairy Industry Commission, will probably be raised also by the Meat Producers' Board for the reason that it is proposed that the Council shall be given an oVer-riding authority over all the produce boards in matters that are considered by it to affect the national interests. Obviously, under this proposal, as the Council would determine the matters- that involve the national interests, the powers of the produce boards would be liable to be severely clipped. The opposition of all of them to it would, therefore, be perfectly intelligible. There are other considerations, however, by which the proposal must be judged. The creation of a new department of State is a step which is not likely on general principles to be viewed with much favour, and a special ground on which it may be expected to provoke criticism is that it will transfer the control of important business transactions from trade interests to officers of the Government. Any proposal of this nature can only be justified by arguments that possess exceptional force. It is to be conceded, hoAvever, that the Commission has presented a case in support of its recommendation that cannot be lightly disregarded. It points out that there has been little cohesion or coordination of effort among the produce boards and that, in fact, the interests of the producers served by these boards may actually conflict. This might not have mattered so very much if the growth of the spirit of national self-sufficiency had not had the effect of so gravely disturbing the marketing conditions as, in the words of the Commission, to indicate very clearly that we must abandon our traditional view o£ the United Kingdom as a bottomless market and to force into prominence the need of " an organisation of our national resources and a sustained, concentrated endeavour on the part of all primaryexporting industries not only to find and exploit additional markets, but also to develop as far as possible alternative types of products. There is undoubted force in the conclusion which the Commission expresses that comprehensive schemes of co-ordinated production cannot be undertaken successfully by the produce boards, each acting independently to the other. Nor is it possible to be entirely satisfied that these boards would be able to agree among themselves upon a common policy suited to the circumstances that have arisen. The proposal to establish a Council of Production and Trade derives a certain weight from these considerations. It is no sufficient argument against the proposal to say that the Council would over-ride the powers of the produce boards. The representatives of the producers on the boards of the various export industries should be capable of controlling their affairs to the best advantage. Yet there are limits beyond which the powers of any of them may be exercised very imperfectly and very ineffectively, and it would plainly be beneficial to the industries if some means of co-ordinating their activities and of enforcing this co-ordination wore devised. But the idea that the C4overnment should itself constitute, through the creation of a fresh department, the co-ordinating authority is one that excites concern, not only as