THE INDUSTRIAL CRISIS

Otago Witness, Issue 3030, 10 April 1912, Page 81

THE INDUSTRIAL CRISIS

IV. CAN SOCIAL RELATIONS BE IMPROVED, AND HOW? By " Veritas." That nothing can be gained by the barbaric method of using mere unregulated force should be self-evident. Improvement must come from (1) legislation, (2) public opinion. 1. The responsibility for the first rests with the chosen representatives of the people and with the people themselves in choosing their representatives. The gravity of this responsibility must be recognised if measures are to be adopted really conducive to the common welfare and not merely in the interests of any particular class or section of the community. Such measures can only be of permanent good when in accordance with the fundamental principles on which the common good depends. Every measure must be dealt with on its own merits and on consideration of how nearly it approximates to such principles. In dealing with such a difficult subject it is not pretended that it is possible to formulate briefly any particular measure which could be claimed as a sovereign remedy. It may, however, be suggested in what direction it would seem that legislative forces should be aimed.

Some measures appear to be required in the direction of limiting profits derivable from certain undertakings. The insistent dema-nd for more equal conditions, being founded on justice, must sooner or later receive consideration. It would appear imperative that at least exorbitant profit* in businesses dealing with public utilities should be prohibited. The public as a whole should have a right to demand the supply of all reasonable necessaries and comforts of life at reasonable rates. Those who make undue profits out of such supply are enemies to the p"ublic interests, and are doing what will produce discontent and social troubles. Beings brought into the world and doing a fair share in bearing the burdens of life are entitled to a fair share of the benefit of what is available. Everyone who undertakes a business involving dealing with what is reasonably required by all should be considered as undertaking it subject to the obligations imposed by the requirements of public interest. Tnere can surely be no injustice in that. This principle should apply throughout to all occupations which may be termed public callings, whether involving the supply of goods or services. The supply of luxuries, on the other hand, may be left to take care of itself, as public interests do not require them.

The demand for State ownership of industries may become a question which will have to be -faced. This, however, it is believed, would never be found either practicable or desirable. There is an alternative to which those who do not believe in and do not wish to have State ownership would do well to give timely consideration, and that is some measure of State control. To ensure the supply at reasonable rates of the requirement of public interest it would seem that such industries and undertakings as are involved in the supply of them should be more or less under State control to such extent as may be found necessary, in such respects, for example, as : (a) Regulating conditions of employment; (b) ensuring supply to the public at reasonable rates of goods or services required for public utilities; (c) protecting such industries against undue competition on the one hand and prohibiting monopoly on the other; (d) requiring returns showing the profits which are derived from same. State control should be limited strictly to what is found necessary in order that industries should be carried on under conditions which are reasonably fair to those engaged in them, and reasonably necessary for protection of public interests. Ihere should be no State ownership except, perhaps, in special instances where it is found that they cannot otherwise be carried on for the common good. It is contended that on the whole industries can be more efficiently and economically carried on by private enterprise, and the public would lose the benefit of such efficiency and economy by State ownership. So long as private enterprise is prepared to comply with the conditions which the State in the public interests deems necessary to impose, it should be not merely permitted but encouraged to continue industrial undertakings, and should be permitted liberally, but not exorbitantly, to recompense itself. State control, it is claimed, will be infinitely better than State ownership, and according to the present trend of ideas it would appear that a choice will have to be made of the one or the other.

Although public interest has a right to demand that exorbitant p'-ofite shall not be allowed, it can claim no right to take services which are not fairly recompensed. To settle what is fair recompense is no doubt the difficulty. Failing any other standard, the question must surely be chiefly on the necessity for the services, settled according to what the services are worth. In the end this must depend on the numbers capable of and willing to (perform them, and the efficiency with which they are performed. A test of the necessity for the services is : What will people pay for them rather than do without or perform them for themselves ? A test of the number of persons available is : What will they offer to do them for ? A te6t of the efficiency is the higher remuneration some can command in preference to others. Each of these tests is an element which must be considered in adopting any standard whereby to fix remuneration. If there is a method by which these various elements might be brought into play, why should it not be tried ? It is suggested that the system of co-operation might be encouraged and extended with this object. If workers in. any industry claim that they are not get-

ting their fair share of the profits, why not let those workers who are dissatisfied be encouraged and assisted to organise a concern of their own on a co-operative basis ? It is to be understood that there is to be no coercion of those who are satisfied with existing conditions. Labour unions should not be allowed to compel those who are r,;'" ''. to join the dissatisfied in the ■ : -ng, but instead

of using their fuuu* promote strikes, they can be encouraged to put them to a better use by contributing towards establishing undertakings on co-operative lines. Workers who think that experinece, intellect, and administrative ability are unnecessary to the successful carrying on of the industry in which they are engaged, or too highly paid, may test the question by managing and running a concern themselves. The necessary capital might be advanced by the State. It would merely be an extension of the principle of advances to settlers and advances to workers. There is no reason why the State should not advance money to aggregations of workers as it does to individuals. 2. Public sentiment as a factor in improving social conditions is more important even than legislation. The efficacy of the latter depends, indeed, on how far it is supported by the former. The responsibility for public sentiment naturally rests with the people themselves as a whole, and particularly with those who by reason of their abilities and opportunities are in a position of being able, more or less, to influence public thought. What is wanted is that more energy and ability should be devoted to the furtherance of public interests. At present too much interest is centred on the individual good and not sufficient on the general good. No doubt self-interest must always be the dominating motive, but if it is fully realised that the greater the general welfare, the greater the individual pelfinterest will assume a different complexion. At present the deciding factor always seems to be " What money is in it?" The tendency is for the individual to look for an immediate pecuniary gain. This seems to meet with the approval of public sentiment, which generally givea more credit to the individual for what he is worth in money than for what he has done in the general interests.of the community. It is notorious that the ablest cannot be got to enter public life. Those who are best fitted and whose intellect and abilities are most needed by the community are for the most part found to remain in private life, devoting themselves almost exclusively to private business, and taking little or no interest in public affairs. Why is this ? Because they consider that it does not pay to enter public life. "There is no money in it." Surely this is evidence of a perverted public sentiment. Means should be taken to develop a sounder knowledge of the laws which in fact and in truth regulate social wellbeing. Not mere theorising on what fanciful schemes should accomplish, but actual knowledge of what doe* in. fact exist, and its bearing on proposed schemes is requisite. To endeavour to apply a. remedy without a knowledge of real and existing conditions is like trying to cure a patient without understanding the symptoms or by blindly disregarding the surrounding circumstances. It is at. the present time an urgent need that a healthy public sentiment should he cultivated in regard to desire for the general good, as against mere self-interest as a motive of conduct.

Those w.ho believe in, and recognise, the importance of this principle should by every means in their power endeavour to take a share in promoting it, whether by pen, speech, or example. Let public opinion and sentiment improve, and conditions will improve automatically. The process may require time, but progress on sound lines alone can be of permanent bsnefit. All means bv which public thought can be affected should be utilised. The chief hope is with the education of the young, who are not yet subject to the influence of prevailing sentiment. Let education be directed so that the necessity for higher standards of motive with regard to public interests be emphasised. Let the duties of citizenship in the highest sense be impressed upon the young, and a zeal and enthusiasm be kindled so that they will grow up with a sounder comprehension of what is dxie from them. Let them understand that something is due from them to the communitv in return for their education and that its benefits are not conferred for them to use solely for their own ends. But the movement need not he confinrd to education of the young. Suroly the subject is worthv of the zeaJ and enthusiasm of both old and young. Kxample is needed as well ae precept. The young must see that their elders are in earnest for the teaching to be effective. Let <liere be a real desire and endeavour to brinrr men together on a basis of proodwill towards one another. TJntil there is something approaching this, distrust and suspicion must continue, and there can be no hope of contentment or social peaeo. But to succeed the effort, will have to be irenuine. and also mutual and reciprocal, not confined to any one clas« 0* s»'tion. b"t supported by the men of all classes who feel that rommnnitv of inWpr.t makes it imoerative that conflicting claims must be modified a.nd reconciled on a basis consonant with the fundamental principles whi<*h govern the existence of organised societv.