BUILDERS FORCED TO USE SHODDY N.Z. MADE MATERIALS

Wanganui Chronicle, 25 February 1947, Page 5

BUILDERS FORCED TO USE SHODDY N.Z. MADE MATERIALS

(P.A.) Auckland, Feb. 24.

Concern that builders were being forced to use shoddy materials produced by New Zealand manufacturers, who, to a degree, held a monopoly of production of certain building materials, was expressed by Mr. H. J. Hulse, president of the New Zealand Federated Builders and Contractors’ Industrial Association of Employers, in his address at the opening of the association's annual conference in Auckland.

"Builders can find little fault with the general establishment of secondary industries in the Dominion, but are strongly opposed to the granting of monopolies in any form whatever, wnether ay tariff control, import selection, or by Act of Parliament,” said Mr. Hulse.

The purchase cost of some of New Zealand-made materials builders had to use was high, and the cost of using and maintaining them was almost twice that ,of imported products. Since builders last met at their annual conference they had experienced a full year of unparalleled shortages ot timber, hardware, wail linings, steel, cement, baths and in fact most of tlie materials required by the industry to carry out the tremendous obligations of their trade, said Mr. Hulse. The wholesale devastation which had taken place in Britain and Europe would continue to be responsible for material shortage in New Zealand for a long time yet. A recent statement by the Commissioner of State Forests, that there was a promise of a substantial increase in timber production in New Zealand was welcome news for builders, but even if the promise became a fact, there would have to be considerably greater supplies of such other essentials of building, such as bricks, wall linings, roof tiles and hardware, before builders could produce a finished house. The offering of extremely high wages by some employers in other industries was very dangerous, and would have, the effect of creating uncontrolled competition for labour. The principal culprits were engaged in the new industry, although some established organisations continued to offer higher- wages and other amenities to induce workers to them. These foolish practices were drawing labour from essentia) industries, some of which were vitally concerned in the production of materials required for the construction of homes for homeless people. "There has already been a substantial reduction in building costs by the abolition of the sales tax, but this, in turn, is almost cancelled by the increased costs of wages and materials.” Mr. Hulse continued. “With the increased cost of dwellings it seems almost impossible for the average working man to finance the building of his own home, even with the aid of liberal advances from private local body and State lending institutions. Rent and restrictive legislation and controls have had the effect of making the financing of building by private investors uneconomic.”

Mr. Hulse referred to the method of disposal of Slate houses, describing it as a political problem. The method of financing the present Government's housing scheme was open to serious question, he said. One section of workers and others were required to contribute indirectly portion of the rental for a privileged few to have cheap houses with rents fixed on the 1936 basis, a rental still in operation in spite of a 50 per cent, increase in costs of construction since then.

He criticised the Opposition, too, for their scheme of utilising these low rentals as a basis of the selling price of homes.