EFFICIENCY BILL

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 79, Issue 246, 17 October 1936, Page 8

EFFICIENCY BILL

THE COMMITTEE STAGES SHORT TITLE PASSED A POLSON—PARRY “BREEZE” I Per Press Associpt’on] WELLINGTON, Oct. 16. The House resumed at 2.30 p.m., and the committee stage of the Industrial Efficiency Bill was commenced. Speaking on the Short Title, the Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes thought it was a serious error to proceed with the Bill at the present stage. He said it would have an adverse effect on trade with Britain. He said that the Minister’s intention might be one thing [but the effect of the legislation another. He referred to criticism made on the Bill by a prominent English businessman in Dunedin, and said that undoubtedly those remarks would be cabled Home and would be heeded as coming from the man on the spot. The Hon. D. G. Sullivan referred to the powers that already existed in the Board of Trade Act to control industry. He went on to refer to the businessman mentioned by Mr Forbes and to the hospitality that had been extended to him and his party bj' the Government. The Government’s reward was that that gentleman was following the steps he took in Canada, where he delivered a criticism of the Canadian Government and where stringent exception was taken to his remarks. He was no sooner in New Zealand than he presumed to interfere in the legislation before the New Zealand Parliament, dealing with her own internal affairs and internal economy, and suggesting that the Government should consult the financiers of London before the legislation was passed. The Minister would be immensely surprised if that action was not strongly resented by the authorities in the Old Country.' To him it. seemed a most extraordinary attitude, and very much like a visitor going into a man’s homo and presuming to discuss the internal economy of the home. The Hon. W. E. Barnard (Napier) said that it was quite open to any visitor to New Zealand, if he was a man with special information on any subject, to make that information known to the heads of the Government. The heads of any Government in New Zealand were at all times willing to receive advice, even to citicism, in their offices from visitors to New Zealand if they were qualified to give that advice or criticism. He thought that had been clone by every Government. It had been done quite recently by members of the very body mentioned that afternoon. If Mr Forbes were in Britain and some legislation was before the House of Commons and he thought it would have a detrimental effect upon the people of New Zealand, he would go to the Prime Minister or the Minister in charge of the legislation privately and put his views before him in that way. Mr Barnard was sure Mr Forbes would be the last man to go to the newspapers and publish statements setting out his views on the legislation proposed to be passed by Britain, or broadcasting it. Mr Barnard thought Mr Forbes would have too much good taste to adopt any such method as that. “Surely the practice we ourselves would adhere to was the practice we would expect visitors to adhere to when they come here,” Mr Barnard proceeded. “That is a partice, whether they be commoners or noble Lords.” He went on to say that if the gentleman in question had waited on the Minister he was sure the Minister would have been very pleased indeed to have listened to his comments and to anything he had to say, but there was a right way and a wrong way to do those things. Mr W. J. Polson (Opp., Stratford) said the visitor was only giving advice. A heated exchange occurred at this stage between the Hon. W. E. Parry and Mr Polson, and Mr W. J. Broadfoot (Opp., Waitomo) rose to a point of order, and asked if Mr Parry were permitted to refer to Mr Polson as "as a fool.” The Chairman of Committees, Mr E. J. Howard, said that Mr Polson had referred to Mr Parry as “ignorant.” Mr Polson: I regard the gentleman as the biggest fool in the Government Mr Parry: I will settle that outside with you afterwards. Mr Polson: The hon. gentleman is | running true to form. It is only what I would expect from him. Mr Polson said that he was sorry the Minister of Industries and Commerce was so annoyed at the remarks made because nothing must have been further from the speaker’s mind that the remarks would be resented. His object was to be helpful. The Rt. Hon. M. J. Savage said the object of the Bill was to put industry in New Zealand on a more scientific basis than it had been in the past. He strongly commented on what he said was an attempt by the Opposition to draw out statements that would injure New Zealand in ftie Old Country. The Government was not going to do anything that would reflect on New Zealand’s best customers overseas, and those who said they were doing so were acting, not only against the people of New Zealand, but against the people of Britain. Mr Alfred Ransom (Opp., Pahiatua) expressed surprise at members becoming annoyed at the remarks of a visitor who had endeavoured to assist and give some advice regarding overseas trade. The Hon. W. E. Parry said the Government had not yet started to organise the country. Yet, in a way, it ought to be organised. Before they started to fill New Zealand’s empty spaces they had to plan to see that the job was done properly. He said New Zealand bought from Britain goods to the value cf £8 11s 9d per head of population, and Britain bought goods from New Zealand to the value of 16s per head of population. He said that while Britain was a good customer of New Zealand, New Zealand was a good customer of Britain. New Zealand bought four times more per head of population than Canada and twice more than Australia per head of population. The short title was passed, and the House rose at 5.20 p.m.