PROFITEERING COMMITTEES

Taranaki Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 16688, 10 March 1920, Page 2

PROFITEERING COMMITTEES

READY TO RECEIVE COMPLAINTS,

(By Telegraph—Own Correspondent.) WELLINGTON, Maroir.o. Remarks made by the Prime ’Minicster in the course of his reply to a deputation indicated that there is a possibility of another member being appointed to the' Board of Trade. Mr. Massey said that he - would be glad to refer any specific allegation of overcharging to the Board of Trade, although that body was so overworked that it might he necessary to'increase the number of its members shortly. It lias been known, that in the past many matters Referred to the. Board of Trade have had to wait some time before the members were able to give them their attention. At present, the board consists of three members and it had been suggested that if '-another member were appointed to the board, when pressure of work made it necessary, could split into two and.thus get through probably double- the / amount at present accomplished. The precise functions of the profiteering tribunals appointed in four centres do not appear to be very (dear, but the idea seems to bo that they should x hear any complaints made -in areas within their scope and report to; the Board of Trade as to the advisability of proceedings being taken. Mr. C. M. Luke, member of the Wellington committee was unable to-day to speak of the methods to b© adopted. It was a matter of considerable moment that the public should avail itself of the opportunity of laying any evidence it might have on a question so vita! to the community before the body appointed for its investigation. The committee, he believed, could only deal with complaints and had, no power "of initiation, that was in the province of the Board of Trade, but it might be that the Act could bo interpreted to give them wider power. This was a. question for the legal* advisers and it should be an inducement for the people'to come, forward that inquiries would be held in private. At the same time he trusted that the committee would not be. looked upon as a mere buffer between Parliament and the’people. It might be desirable in some instances to publish some of the information received, when circumstances warranted'it, as a warning and safeguard against profiteering, which, in the general opinion, was unduly prevalent.