The Daily Worker Newspaper, August 1, 1925, Page 10

re erent re A NNR A rennet a SE EE ER SE CE RR nn eS NR en a RN Sn A EE i RUSSIA TODAY! Official Report of British Trad | (Continued from Y esterday’s Daily Worker ) | The general recovery by private enterprise of some of its lost start is attributable to the stimulus given to trade by the stabilization of the currency and the new economic relation with the peasantry that caused a growth of retail trade in the provinces, of which the big official enterprises could not take immediate advantages. Since then a slower rate of develop- ment and the extension of the activities of Government Trusts and trading into the smaller towns has given less favorable opportunities to the private trader. STATE, CO-OPERATIVE, AND PRIVATE TRADE. Percentage of total trade, 1923-24. 1st quarter. 2nd quarter. 3rd quarter. 4th quarter, Textile Syndicate and Trusts. Cotton yarn: ONG a ossecstensin ae : Seren . ere 30 Co-operative A acces TRA i eee 56 PTR sshdicancin = ee 36 ne ps ee | Linen yarn: ‘ BG sass escencaiscerecctoingny Se nn ce Pet a OR cn Oe Co-operative . SRR As "ae ree Be ens a 6 REI Sicha WR) chagece, (Mk aan 1 Ekiaxwc era 6 Woolen yarn: SEN Nsetads cservesiaiocnasaas ee Aes 80 sicmnn 81 Co-operative . B Saoseees TO Gestion D -:eansnans lv RS VMOINS iaiaceissscasstuhins 7 WO iain ea RS 2 Leathey Syndicate and Trusts. Leather goods: State 30 25 24 Co-operative 36 35 Oe wk 47 Private .... 34 40 32. . hws 29 Sugar Trust. Sugar: ‘ BIEL Aiciniemiarsiatiniesticiand ners 21 Co-operative .. ie Oe cachsin 51 WUISMAD: “sisssctsensiin vision “a a es 28 Salt Syndicate, Salt: eg A AM - ae > Sage 15 9 Co-operative .. 5 eres ey 5 ccathany OB) ina 81 PUTO ‘seccemsntapeciuens WO: sntencte oe, eee 17 10 Oil Syndicate. Kerosene: BRON sctinsnigountocajieabiviceiin ee } : ere a 29 Co-operative .. Oe canine Oe <nekalion , em 41 PURO: dibisnnahtinseslisees 1 eee ame SB this 30 Total sales on Moscow Goods Exchange: 4 Co-operative 1 Ekg eee ae 1B. ties 25 Private BL sisenes Se tales fpr eek 8 The above figures suggest that co-operatives are gaining ground on private trade, with results examined in the chapter on ecv-opératives. Private enterprise is fulfilling the» function assigned it, of acting as pacemaker and pilot to State enter- prise. For the New Economic Policy is based on the conviction that the principles of the Revolution and the predominarce of the workers will be sufficiently secured if the State retains com- mand of the bulk of the capital and credit in the country and of its foreign commerce. Also that State enterprise can only be made efficient if put on the same business basis as private enterprises and brought into free and fair competition with them. In this competition private enterprise opens the new fields, and as these new fields come to be organised and oper- ated on a large scale State organisations gradually drive private enterprise further afield again. So far as can be judged at present the superior economy and energy of the private owner will tell in small industry, and retail trade, while Government credit and co-operation will pre- bg any considerable control of large industry by private cap- tal. - According to one good authority (Larin, “New Commercial Policy,” 1924, page 19) the restoration of private trade has been so rapid that by the end of 1923, in Russia proper, private trad- ers conducted nine-tenths of the retail village trade, four-fifths of the retail town trade, and nearly half of. the town wholesale- retail. This last figure is confirmed by official estimates for the whole Union, which show wholesale and wholcsale-retail’ urban trade distributed: 57 per cent. to State trading, 9 per cent. to co-operatives, and 34 per cent to private traders. State and Private Manufactures BR It is difficult within the limits of this report to deal with a comparison of State and private production. The following may give some idea of their present relationship: In the cotton textile industry 95 per cent. of the Turkestan crop was in 1923 taken up by the Trust (Turkkhlopkom), leaving only 5 per cent. for private industry, and of the Khoresm and. Bokhara crops some 15 per cent. to 20 per cent. went to private industry. Of woo} manufactures in 1923 22 per cent. to 25 per cent. were fron private industry, In this industry private enterprise prof- ited by:.want of solidarity as between State enterprises. In leather manufactures private industry in 1923-24 provided about 10 per cent.. It would appear, moreover, that private industrials were often able to raise prices generally even with this small proportion of the business. , Middlemen Gis \ dt is also noteworthy that of the wool used by the Stite Trusts only 30 per cent. was in 1923.bought direct from the producer and the remainder through. private dealers.. In the linen industry information on this point is less detailed; but it appears that in 1923-24 of the five Trusts two are sufficiently equipped to get their raw material direct from the producer, the remaining three do so through middlemen. The leather _ for in 1922 and 1923.” manufacturing Trusts obtain their material wholly through mid- dlemen. ; é Bread production was, in 1923-24, estimated as being still to about 27 per cent. in private hands. - But this proportion was not growing, and Government ‘enterprises lost no ground when the sale was entirely freed and the wheat tithe in kind was con- verted into a money tax. On the other hand, the supply of the two main centres of consumption, Moscow and Leningrad, was more than half in private hands. sad hi But enough has been said on this point to give an. idea of, the present relation between public and private enterprise, Profiteering ie The large share acquired by private trading, while: greatly facilitating trade, has led to some profiteering. <The State Trusts are, it is true, restricted to a profit of 13 per cent. as between their wholesale and retail prices. But private traders have hecn found to be making as much as 33 per cent. at. Khar- kov, and 150 per cent. at Rostov, and the same articles Were found to cost double’ at Rostov what they did at Kharkov. It seems quite possible, however, that the average difference be- tween wholesale and retail prices is no more than 50 per cent. (as stated in a report of Rykov), which would compare well _ with conditions elsewhere. Cases of exaggerated profits are also generally found to be due to a local and temporary excess of demand over supply. They were worse in 1923, a period before the currency stabiliza- . tion when prices included a large insurance against loss by depreciation of the rouble. They will no doubt disappear when industry can keep local markets fully and fairly supplied, also when the State trading and co-operative retail enterprises are more fully developed. An outbreak of profuse private expenditure and profligacy in Moscow that resulted from the profiteering in 1922 and 1923 was sternly checked. Several thousand profiteers were ban- ished from Moscow. Future of Private Enterprise : The Communist Party is much occupied with proposals for checking such profiteering by “nepmen.” But on the one hand it must be borne in mind that profiteering in Russia is mainly attributable to the present transition stage, and is in the aggre- gate and on an average much less excessive than in other coun- tries, and, on the other hand, that there must be a greater diffi- culty in regulating private trading profits in Russia, even under Socialism, than elsewhere. For a calculation, unnecessary to reproduce, shows that of the total retail trade, 475 million gold roubles per quarter, only 282 million passed through. wholesale. trade. ‘The remainder, ahout two-fifths of the whole, passed direct from small producer to small consumer: prices in this direct local trade can only be effected indirectly through competition of State trading concerns and co-operation. The State Trusts should be able to compete advantagcously with the private trader, because they can work on longer credit (one to three months in 1924 as against one month to a week for private trade); and because the State Trust can, if neces- sary, be content with a manufacturing profit only—cutting the whole commercial profit on which the trader depends. That the growth of private trading has reached its limit, ang that private enterprise is turning now to ‘small industries, is sug- gested by a comparative classification of the licenses applied Licenses ‘ De i 1922 1923 For commercial enterprises . 523 thousand © 346 thousand For industrial enterprises 162 thousand 243 thousand For industrial occupations .. .« 313. thousand 423 thousand 998 thousand 1017 thousand Organization and Regulation of Industry The authority ovér industry is the Council‘of Labor and Defense (Sto) and its provincial and district economic authori- ties (EkoBo). General dispositions of this Council, enforcing the economic program (Gosplan), are directly applicable. Otherwise decrees concerning industry are’ executed’ through the Supreme Economic Council and its local organs, the district bureau (Promburo); and the Provincial Councils of National Economy. The administrative authority’ of the S.E. Council ‘over Trusts‘ is very considerable; but over mixed and private companies is limited in principle to seeing that legislation and . the terms of ‘their concessions are observed. At the last reorganization of the S‘E. Council the dval | character of its responsibility for State Trusts was recognized by a division of its functions between a Central Administration of the national industry (Zubrom), which is a general adminis-’ . executive, years. “Who Is \ Bitteh [ie HERBERT SMITE years president York deration. President, tion of Great Britain _ president, 1907: Se xoyal commissions. tionals Minéts’ ‘Con _. of schodk board, Wes: county coundibandot for many years.:\Me1 ary committee, trade 1913-16, and general Appointed J. P. in 19 tral committee, min central committee,; n board. ys BEN TILLETT,. 2 of trade unions §} of Dockers’ Unio from the Tea C'p Laborers” Union dst A pioneer of trade nationally. Conteste: mentary elections. EF Remained dockers’ ¢ until amalgamation 1 General Workers’ Un ary of Political and partment of Amal; Member of trades un: eral council since 1 parliamentary com union congress, 18924 es * JOHN TURNER, socialist organization timate with founders socialist thought, = Morris, Belfort Bax, neers. Closely associ Kropotkin from 1886 to Russia in 1917. A hours legislation and Assistants’ Union. union from 1898 unt general ‘secretary afi in, this position until generalcouncil; trade “Regulationtiot A0P4; rerelected> by:co to 1924 for period:to * * JOHN BROMLEY, of railway trade un many positions of tr pointment as branch sociated Society of Lx eers and Fireman, 1 ganizing secretary of Secretary also of cor BRlected general sécrei 1914. Elected membe 1920 and member of trades uni eral council, 1922-24. * bor party. del t times candidate. 1924, Prominenthy as bor and socialist. ses ALAN A: H. FIND United: Patternmake since 1893. Branch other offices. Electe eral secretary; execu 1913, Elected genera) Formerly treasurer, ‘Shipbuilding ‘Trades three years, subseqt “president, at present position, Elected to t gress general council each year until 1924, September, 1925. . ¢ A, Av PURCELL (c gation). Member, Fu Union since 1891.}M mocratic fed am trative management of the whole national industry, and a Chief ‘bers Salford Leonomic Administration which performs the usual function, of a Ministry of Industry in regulating industrial activities... _. Gosplan tet sks send ie he But the most interesting and, in some respects, the most important institution in the organization of the economic activi- ties of the Union is the so-called State Planning Commission (Gosplan). This novel instrument for co-ordinating production and trade has its central department in Moscow with branches and agents all through the country. It has no executive or administrative powers, but its advisory authority is very great. Its approval is necessary for the framing of any economic policy generally, and its advice is sought by the administration before provision is made as to any State enterprise or expenditure. The Central Council of “Gosplan” consists of 200 experts, years, -orSeetional: »-s« ateéntly:-organizer; «fo Parliamentary: candic ford, 1910. Contested 24, Elected 1923, Su tor in co-operative an: Elected to general ‘union congress, 1919, year: Elected by. trad tional conférence, V president. President union congress, Vice eral council. .Appoin American labor conve companied the delega: 1920.