INDUSTRIAL CHANGE

Taranaki Daily News, 3 November 1934, Page 5

INDUSTRIAL CHANGE

NEW ZEALAND’S POSITION,

MANUFACTURING POSSIBILITIES. OPINIONS OF BUSINESSMAN. Christchurch, Nov. 1. “To a large degree, the recent discussion on the Tariff Commission’s firfaings and the evidence tendered to the commission resolved itself into a conflict between the interests of the importer and the local manufacturer. The question is one of vital importance and one in respect of which the Dominion, by reason of recent events, seems to stand at the parting of the ways," said Mr. A. M. Seaman in Iris presidential address at the annual conference in Christchurch to-day of the Associated Chambers of Commerce.

Hitherto we have relied for our ex- j pansion, and for the absorption of. our growing population, upon our primary; producing industries, and on those activities directly ancillary to then!; w® have assumed that we could increase production indefinitely, and would always have an unlimited power of disposal in the markets of the world, and more particularly in those of Great Britain,” h« continued.

“Changing conditions have now closed many overseas markets to us, and thq British market is possible to be a limited one; certainly we can no longer assume that we can continue to increase; our primary production without limit and to put more and more men on the land. The position must be faced, and it seems to me, despite my deep-rooted objection to a policy of economic nationalism, that we must give careful thought to the wisdom of extending our manufacturing activities, even if only with the idea’ of finding useful occupation for our citizens.

“As I understand the position, the Unemployment Board has no desire to start new industries, or to bolster up existing industries, that have no prospect of sue- z cessfully meeting reasonable competition from overseas- It is, however, very much alive to the need for greater activity in creating, if possible, new avenues of employment. The board's purpose seems to be commendable, and it should be productive of good if wisely administered. GOOD SEEN IN POLICY. It would clearly be wrong for the unemployment funds, raised as they are by taxation from all classes, to be used directly for the financial gain of a section of employers, but I see good and not wrong in a policy which may result in the ’ establishment of enterprises which by proper management may provide work for those at present workless, even though the resultant trade may be profitable to the owners of the business. “Surely the country is a gainer if thera is established in our midst an enterprise that, without increasing the cost of goods to the consumer, -is able to benefit both ■employer and employees. The final test 14 this, as in all other efforts at local manufacture, is the ultimate cost to the employment can be provided at too high a price to the community. There ha? been a great deal of criticism of the Unemployment Board’s policy in this regard, both in Chamber of Commerce circles and elsewhere, all of it based, so far as I can judge, on a failure to appreciate the most important fact that a wait and see'attitude, unaccompanied by any constructive effort to create employment, is unlikely to provide for us a way out of our difficulties.” Mr. Seaman said he was becoming more convinced that industrial development must play an important part in the near future, but before it could do so successfully three adverse influences must be overcome. The first of thes« was the opposition of what, for lack of a better term, he would call the extreme importing section, which would almost deny others the right to manufacture anything that could be imported. Th® final answer to this was provided by ths proposals for the imposition of quotas on exports, which, even though they might now be averted, must be accepted as a . warning that New Zealand was living in a fool’s paradise if it based its productive activities on the maintenance of an unrestricted market for its primary products. . REWARD FOR ENTERPRISE. The second, and possibly the most serious deterrent-to the commencement of industrial enterprise, was the growth of the idea that it was almost a crime to make a profit. The successful conduct of business called for the exercise of energy and skill in a high degree, and unless these qualities were allowed to produce a reward for the individual it would inevitably be found that, except for a few whose altruism was unusually strongly developed, full efforts would not be put forth. To him ;t seemed axiomatic that it was a benefit to the community it there was operating a business which, while treating the consumer fairly and honestly, was able to provide congenial and profitable occupation for the employees and a reasonable reward for those who provided the brains and the funds for its conduct.

The third factor to be contended witi| was the failure on the part of many individual heads to make their concerns truly efficient. One found that too little attention was paid by many manufacturers to possible defects in their that in most cases the absence of proper: costing systems left them in . the . dark; as to the true costs of production of individual lines and as to possibilities oj savings that could be passed on to thq consumer in lower prices; that too often selling prices were based on the cost efi the imported competing article rathet; than on the cost of local efficient pro* duction. Taken in the mass, one found? that the public was expected to pay for the inefficient handling of ‘individual businesses and for the over-capitalisation of particular industries. Until this spirit was done away with there must always be some measure of justifiable opposition to local manufacturing, and some justification for the fear that there might ba exploitation in the shelter of a high customs duty.