WATERSIDE UNION FUNDS.

Auckland Star, Volume LIII, Issue 194, 17 August 1922, Page 4

WATERSIDE UNION FUNDS.

• CIOOO ALLEGED TO BE MISSIHQ COMPULSORY AUDIT OF UXIOX FUNDS. (By Telegraph—Parliamentary Reporter., WELLINGTON, Wednesday The report that at the annual meeting of the Wellington Waterside Worker* ' Union it was disclosed that an official ( was AIOOO short in his accounts { wae brought under the notice of the . Minister of Labour by the member for Roskill (Mr. V. 11. Potter), who mad* ' the suggestion that the Government should see if it has the power to enforce r prosecution and recovery of the funds alleged to be short, ami whether there is statutory power to protect trade union funds from peculation. The Minister of Labour replied that he had had his attention drawn to the report, and a* for the further suggestions he stated "it is regretted that the •Labour Department has not power to institute investigation, hut if the theft I has taken place the matter can no doubt jbe dealt with by the Police Depart- ! ment, to which tiie question l mg hg en I referred to for inquiry. The question of j providing fuller safeguards against the misuse of union funds is now receiving consideration." In discussing this reply Mr. Potter alleged that union funds in New Zealand were being misused to a great extent The law compelled men to join unions therefore the Government should look after the interests of the unionists and see that the funds of the unions were conserved. The Government should certainly make the audit of accounts compulsory. It was significant that no union had demanded such a measure, and when he proposed a public audit of union funds there was a howl from the Labour benches. Men had been appointed to positions'of secretary of unions who had had very little secretarial education. Such appointments were due not to the ability of the candidate, but to his popu. larity. The recent prosecution was probably not instituted in the interests of the Alliance of Labour. If the books of unions -Cvere called in for audit to-day without giving any warning to officials the result would stagger Xew Zealand. The Alliance of Labour would be the first to refuse. Thfe Hon. G. J. Anderson. Minister of Labour, stated that the defalcations had been brought under his notice before tli« member for Roekill had raised a question in the House. It. was brought under his notice by several members of the Wharf Labourers' L'nion. He made inquiries and found that there was every reason to believe that the information was correct. The matter was then handed over to the police. He waa having investigations made throughout the country. There was another case in which a miniW of working people were interested in a co-operative concern which had lost about £1300 as a result of defalcations. Unions registered under the Trades Union Act were compelled to forward to the Labour Department aif audited balance-sheet, and he proposed to ask the House to extend that provision to all other unions. Mr. Parry: Will you insist upon all other institutions doing the same? The Minister: '"I won't say that, hut there must be legislation to protect the funds of unions and to protect unions and their members." He had handed what information he had to the Minister of Justice, ami it was for him to continue the investigations and Inquiries by the police. The Hon. E. P. Lee. Minister of Justice, stated that members of the union who were present when the defalcations were discussed waited upon the poiica i and gave general information as to their I nature. It was, however, necessary, as ' members would recognise, that before a prosecution could be instituted that information ehould lie specific in character. The information which the police had received was not sufficiently specific. He had discussed the matter with the Commissioner of Police. The proper course would be to obtain information from the president of the executive of the union. A member of the police force waa then detailed to interview the president. Mr. Glover. The oflh-er said to Mr. Glover: "I have been instructed to call and ccc you in reference to rumours which have been circulated regarding your union.' , Mr. Glover replied: '"It is true that the rumour is in circulation, but at the present time I am not in a position to give you any information. That is all I have to say."' That report was dated August 10. fNnee that time Mr. Glover had not communicated any information to the police. The position was highly unsatisfactory. By this time the officers of the union must know the position— whether there have been heavy defalcations or not. If they were satisfied that no defalcations had taken place they should so inform the police. If, on the other hand, they were satisfied that there had been no defalcations their duty to the police was obviours. A LABOUR PROTEST. Mr. Holland protested against the whole discussion, and described the procedure as extraordinary. Xo definite charge had been levelled'agaJnst anyone, and the matter had been brought before the House by a member who" was not interested in unions—a man who. in fact. was a strike breaker in the Waihi strike °n the *ide of the employers. Let the Government prosecute in' cases of Departmental defalcations, not hush them Up as had been the case recently. He ventured to say that if there had been defalcation* in the Waterside Workers , I nion that body would take action. Labour member* had no time for tlrnt-e who took union funds. He complained that although Ministers had made statements which they could not substantiate, they had repeatedly hushed up Public .Service cases. The l'rime Minister: To which cafe are you referring? Mr. Holland mentioned the name of a former Departmental head. Mr Ma**ei' retorting "You don't know anything about it. •