ROOSEVELT CODE

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18191, 12 September 1933, Page 2

ROOSEVELT CODE

IMITATING NEW ZEALAND 9 POOR COUNTERFEIT LABOR MEMBER’S VIEW “The. Roosevelt code is but a poor imitation of what we have had in New Zealand for years. Mr. W. Nash (Labor M.P. for Hutt), being on the spot, recognised this, and told his Canadian audience in Saskatchewan that the muchvaunted Roosevelt code had been operating in New Zealand for decades. 11ns observation was made by the actingPrime Minister, the Hon. ,T. G. Coates, when discussing President Roosevelt s industrial code in the course of a public address at Opawa, Christchurch. . Aftei mentioning that the unemployed m the United States of America amounted to over 15,000,000, Mr. Coates said the ulaii was for industries to present then codes of “fair” competition-compacts In- which the Government allowed them th regulate themselves in return lor giving Labor a lift. “The whole programme is moving consistentlv in the direction of a centrallycontrolled national economy, aid one isolated from the rest of the world, said Mr Coates. “I consider that this wilt be ' one of the greatest obstacles to success. Although the foreign trade ot the U.S.A. is only 6 per cent, ot the total trade, it is‘ of vital importance to the economic health of that country, for many of her products have a world market and a world price which is subject to conditions largely outside ot America’s control. So long as America has any connection with world markets this will he so. . “In addition to this, it lias been estimated that 30 per cent, of the industrial workers of the United States depend for their employment on their industries working at maximum oflicienev. So great are overhead costs that,' if industries do not get a full export market and work to full capacity, in manv cases they cannot produce at a profit. The result is stagnation and unemployment.” LIMITED PRODUCTION

Under the Recovery Act, trade associations could apply* the President lor codes of ' fair * competition. This allowed, ,a) limitation of quantity produced ; (b) fixation of prices, below which members could not- undercut. In return they guaranteed: (1) The right of labor lo organise (this had not been recognised in many cases) ; (2) maximum haul's of labor (in most cases horn's of labor bad not previously been regulated) ; (3) minimum wages (this also had not been guaranteed before). The President would approve any industrial agreements arrived at and had power to extend them to other similar lines of effort. “It will be seen,” Mr. Coates said, “that the United States of America is now just officially emerging, from the laissez-faire policy of economic medievalism, but even so the powers in the Act only apply for two years. New Zealand had better conditions than these in the last century, and Mr. Holland says this is a new thing and advises. New Zealand to imitate.

“The minimum wage that the textile agreement guarantee is 13 dollars a week in the north and 12 dollars in the south. This merely indicates a comparison of conditions prevailing before this agreement. This is the first, official Federal step to arrest, the American rush to economic chaos. It is difficult to explain what 13 dollars a week will buy, as converting at the current exchange rate is quite unsatisfactory because it does not take into account the still extremely high cost of living in the United States of America. Allowing for the fact that costs in Now York are somewhat higher than elsewhere, we can see that a minimum wage of 13 dollars for an adult is not comparable with our minimum wage. In other industries, the minimum has been fixed per week at amounts ranging from 10. dollars to 15 dollars. And Mr. -Holland wants to apply this system to New Zealand. COUNTRIES COMPARED “Mr. Roosevelt’s idea is to raise purchasing power by paying higher hourly rates, but with shorter working hours. By this means he hopes to start industry on the upward trend. But it must be remembered that he is also raising costs and prices. The question to be settled is whether any more goods will be sold. All we can do is to wait and wish Mr. Roosevelt, a fortunate outcome for his spectacular efforts. His administration is trying to put the United States where New Zealand was before our own legislative adjustments were made to meet the position. “On public works, the United States Government, which, by the way, has had enormous and inevitable deficits for the past three years (in 1032 it. was over 2,000,000,000 dollars), is now planning to spend 40(1,000,000 dollars on highway construction. A proportionate amount applied to New Zealand would be £1,000,001). This should be contrasted with the Government’s loan expenditure this year of £3,500,000.

“For unemployment relief the Federal Act of 1933 provides 500,000,000 dollars to relief schemes, one-haif going to States and local bodies for the payment of up to one-third of wages spent on relief works. '.Compare this with our No. 5 and No. 10 schemes. There is nothing new; in fact, the American scheme does not go as far as ours. Also 500,000,000 dollars for unemployment would, if New Zealand spent a proportionate amount, bo £1,250,000. Compare this with £4,000,000 in New Zealand spent on unemployment. I have calculated the proportionate amount spent on a population basis, and they will thus only In? correct to round figures. “If we praise the American attempt to meet the crisis, how much more must we hold in regard to the action that Now eZaland has taken,' I do not want to underestimate what President Roosevelt is doing to meet the economic situation. 1 think 1 am covering all his lines of effort when I include his provision for increased expenditure on the Navy and a small smn for loans for the purchase of subsistence homesteads. Compare our New Zealand small farms scheme. In addition, States and local bodies are also helping with the unemployment problem, as arc the-equivalent authoii-, ties in New Zealand."