CONTROL OF INDUSTRY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23005, 7 October 1936, Page 10

CONTROL OF INDUSTRY

RISE OF PRICES INVOLVED NEW TARIFFS UNAVOIDABLE CRITICISM BY MR COATES (From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, Oct. 6. The provisions of the Industrial •Efficiency Bill were criticised by Mr J. G. Coates (Opposition, Kaipara) during the second reading debate on the Bill in the House of Representatives to-day. Mr Coates contended that the Bill would not have the effect of assisting industry, and held that the Government would have been better advised to have dealt with each branch of industry individually. Mr Coates said the Minister of Industries am Commerce (Mr D. G. Sullivan) had taken credit to himself for an improvement in the wheat and bread industries. The result of the Minister's intervention, however, had been an increase of from a penny to twopence a loaf. Mr Sullivan: The authorised increase in the price of bread is a halfpenny a 21b loaf. * "Well, how is it that the price has gone up more than that? " asked Mr Coates. "In the country districts, where most of the people use the 41b loaf, the price is up by twopence. That is the result of Government control or regulation. The fact remains that people are now paying more for their bread than they were before the alteration was made. The Minister: There has been an increase of a penny per 41b loaf. Mr Coates: It is up twopence in many cases, yet the Minister quotes the bread and wheat industries in support of the introduction of the Bill. "The manufacturers were entitled to ask for what they wanted,' added Mr Coates. " but at the same time one was justified in inquiring if they were satisfied with the Bill. "Licensing has their concurrence, co-ordination has their concurrence, and the Bureau of Industry has their concurrence," said Mr Sullivan, "but the* want to have a larger say in the question whether any plan should or should not be adopted." Mr Coatee said he had been informed that the Minister had told the manufacturers that if they did not agree with the proposals in the Bill he would socialise ev:ry industry in the country. The Minister: I hope the honourable gentleman will accept my word when I say that I said nothing of the kind. What I did say was that if they did not want the Bill that was all right. Mr Coates said he accepted the Minister's statement. Continuing, Mr Coates explained at length the proposals for the assistance of industry developed by the last Government. In the report of the Tariff Commission of 1033, he said, it had been pointed out that certain industries were hot economic and that the tariffs which they enjoyed were perpetuating conditions which were not in the best interests of the industries themselves. Those industries were given two years in which to put their affairs on an economic basis, but the manufacturers then began to ask for some assistance in straightening out the position. The last Government had taken the definite view that the onus was on the manufacturers to improve their own industries. There had apparently been a good deal of dissension, however, and some manufacturers' organisations had asked for powers of compulsion. The Government of that day had not been prepared to go that distance, but it had indicated that, if specific cases of waste or incompetence were brought to its notice, it would be prepared to deal with' the matter by introducing legislation bearing on the industry concerned. That was a reasonable and logical approach to the whole position of efficiency in industry. > The establishment of the so-called bureau, Mr Coates continued, meant the operation of a tariff. The broad policy of the Government, which industry had to stand, meant a definite rise in prices. The Minister of Internal Affairs (Mr W. E. Parry): A slight rise, perhaps. . _ , . , Mr Coates: A big rise, I think. But even if it is a slight rise, slow strangulation can be just as effective as sudden decapitation With both costs and prices rising, Mr Coates said, tariff considerations had to enter into the matter. Mr Sullivan: We know how each industry in the country will be affected by this legislation, and only a handful will be seriously affected. The whole trend of affairs, Mr Coates continued, meant either a rise in tariffs or an embargo on certain classes of imports. If those alternatives were ignored, the Prime Minister might find tiimself in the position of having to raise the rate of exchange still further. Increased costs would inevitably bring the local manufacturer into keener comDetition with the importer.