A TIMELY WARNING

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23013, 16 October 1936, Page 10

A TIMELY WARNING

VISCOUNT ELIBANK SPEAKS OUT INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY BILL EFFECT ON BRITISH CAPITAL A warning, couched in authoritative tones, that British capital, though pre- * pared to take risks, liked a square deal and conditions it could understand, was delivered by Viscount Elibank at the dinner tendered by the Dunedin Chamber of Commerce last evening to the delegates to the Congress of the Federation of Chambers of Commerce of the British Empire, which concluded its deliberations in Wellington. The speaker made no apology for what might be construed into an intrusion into what could be described as a New Zealand affair, and concluded a searching discussion of the Industrial Efficiency Bill, which is now before Parliament, with an appeal to the Government to hold the Bill up until the Minister of Finance (Mr W. Nash), who is now proceeding to England, has an opportunity of ascertaining from the British Government and the City of London what their views are on the provisions contained in it. REACTION OF CAPITAL Introducing the question of British investments in the Dominion, the speaker referred to the Prime Minister's statement at a State luncheon ' tendered to the delegates in Wellington that New Zealand was looking for fresh capital for investment from overseas. As a result, of this remark delegates had been investigating conditions and searching lor opportunities for the investment of such capital. The search had been a genuine and painstaking one, but he would like to point out that British capital was conservative, and, although it was not afraid of taking risks, it asked for a square deal under conditions which it could understand. It did not expect to be taxed out of business, as soon as it was invested. Having studied local conditions very closely he had come to the conclusion that conditions were arising and legislation was being passed which British capital could not be expected to understand, and for that reason British capital was becoming very shy of New Zealand investments. In this he would like to say that he was speaking as an individual with a personal and active interest in New Zealand commerce. ENTITLED TO COMMENT Lord Elibank said he was connected with two companies doing extensive business in New Zealand, and he felt he was entitled, without trespassing on any hospitality, to comment on a measure that was of the utmost importance to overseas capital. He referred to the Industrial Efficiency Bill. He believed that he was justified in the capacity he had described, and in view of certain statements made by the Minister of Industries and Commerce, in what he would say. The Bill, he knew, had met with a lot of opposition, for they were not like Mr Arthur Balfour: they read the press. If it had not been for the statements he had read in the newspapers he would not have intruded into what might reasonably be described as a New Zealand affair. When he referred them to the extracts he proposed to quote not one of them, and he believed not even the Government itself, would think he was trangressing in referring to them. He did it with no desire to . hurt anyone's feelings, but simply because the situation demanded a reply from someone like himself who was in a position to comment upon the Bill.

MINISTERIAL MISAPPREHENSION The Minister of Industries and Commerce, in: referring to the opposition to the Bill in the House of Representatives, had said that as far as he could see the only real opposition was coming from bodies composed largely of representatives of overseas companies. Surely, said Lord Elibank, these bodies (and he as one of .the representatives who had not made a protest proposed to do so now) were, in the light of their investments just as much interested in the prosperity, progress, and development of New Zealand as even the local bodies themselves. In any event, the outside companies which were providing large capital were glad to do so £>nd were prepared to go on doing so, but if that was the way they were to be treated there was little hope that any more capital would come from the place from which most of it came, namely, the City of London.—(Apnlause). - The Minister had gone on to say that the principles of the Bill were being operated by other countries, particularly Great Britain, though he admitted that they d*alt with specific industries. "I think." Lord Elibank continued, " that the Minister is under a misapprehension. I do not think for a moment that he would try to misrepresent anyone. I have met Mi Sullivan, and he did not give me that impression at all. But it is easy to fall into errors about what is happening 12,000 miles away, and I can assure you that no Bill has been passed in Britain that contains the provisions incorporated in the Industrial Efficiency Bill. It is true to say that in Great Britain certain industries have approached the Government and asked, in view of their difficulties, that it should help them and see if it could put their houses in order. Then the British Government stepped in and ?.ny legislation passed has been passed ad hoc and for those specific industry. That is a very different thing f-• ;m a Bill like the Industrial. Efficiency Bill. 1 have read that Bill and [ do not propose to analyse it. That is not"my affair, and all I propose to say that that the Industrial Efficiency Bill is an omnibus Bill under which any industry can be taken charge of by a body of civil servants calling itself the Bureau of Industries. I cannot conceive of the British Government even having such a Bill in contemplation. I speak as an active member of the House of Lords, and I see all the legislation that passes through the House of Commons and ultimately comes into the senior Chamber, but no Bill of this kind has ever been mooted so far as I know by the Government of Great Britain." A STAKE IN THE COUNTRY The third sentence to which he wished to draw attention, he said, was one which was far more pleasing than those which he had already quoted. Mr Sullivan, in the same report, had said that he was anxious to give those engaged in industry a larger say in the adoption of the plans to be followed. " I venture to suggest to the Government," he continued, " that it might give us in Great Britain—and we are the representatives of these outside companies —some opportunity of saying something about this Bill and the measures if contains. We, after all, have a great stake in your country and we have perhaps even a greater stake than may be thought at once, because I find, on reference to the export figures of New Zealand, that of the £47,000,000 of exports which left New Zealand in 1934, £38,000,000 or 80 per cent, went to the United Kingdom and so we are your customers. I think it was that great merchant Mr Gordon Selfridge who had said, 'Customers'are always right.' I won't claim that, but at least they deserve consideration. I should like to make this appeal to the Government—that it should not pass this Bill, and that it should be held up until the Minister of Finance, who is proceeding to England, has an opportunity of ascertaining from the Government of Great Britain what it feels this Bill may mean and also that he might have an opportunity Df conferring with the City of London to ascertain what its view is on the provisions contained in this measure.* He would not have intervened in this subject unless he had felt compelled to do so. He hoped they would not think he had said anything that would offend or seem unpalatable, because that was far removed from his desire They were all of one family and should be able to speak their feelings and

opinions without restrain- -nd without dissimulation. It was in that spirit that he had spoken that night, and he could only conclude with the very warmest expressions of appreciation of the opportunities that had been given him and the hospitality that had been extended to all the delegates.