ARBITRATION BILL.

Auckland Star, Volume LVIII, Issue 277, 23 November 1927, Page 19

ARBITRATION BILL.

BACK FROM COMMITTEE.

FOURTEEN CLAUSES

DISAPPEAR.

j ONLY SEVEN CLAUSES LEFT

STONEWALL AT EVERY STAGE

fij Telegraph. — Parliamentary Reporter.*

WELLINGTON, Tuesday. ( Only seven clauses remain out of 21 which comprised the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill when'it was submitted to the Labour

Bills Committee. Sir;John-Luke (chairman), who presented the report in the House to-day,

explained that the committee had deleted all reference to changes in the constitution of the Arbitration Court. Examination of the bill as reported show#; that, except for the short title, the first ten clauses have been elimi-

nated: . The committee has retained a clause enabling the Court to include in awards provision for payment by results, but it has deleted the proposal which- would have prevented the Court from making Domiiion awards.

Another important deletion is a clause which/would have empowered the Minietgr of: Labour, if satisfied that a strike or lockout is likely to take place, to call a compulsory conference of parties a.nd ende&Vour to secure a voluntary settlements |a Tangle About Thia -BilL'' Opposition frankly set out to «t<pewall every stage of the bill when it came back in attenuated form from the iabour Bills Committee. They talkedHhroughoUt the" afternoon about the allegedly inadequate : explanation by the committee's chairman, and the dinner adjotiinit&ent was reached without puttings the motion that the report beadopted. Ordinarily it would mean the report "standing down until another afteinoon, but' on this occasion, the Prime : Minister movfcd .suspension of the 'Standing Orders to enable the report, to proceed ahead of bills on the Order Paperi f He announced that once this motion was adopted ;there were other committee reports like to dispose of.

"Do ; you propose to,,,take other reports?" asjced Mr. Holland significantly; and the Premier' assented. Mr.- Holland complained that the Government? was pushing-aside, matters for which the country was clamouring, aiid this was being donefforar r a measure that nobody wanted, and on which the Premier was asking them to waste hours and days. Sir Joseph Ward asked why' the Prime Minister, when he knew there was such strong opposition, had not explained his reason for moving suspension of the' Standing Orders. The Federation of:-Labour and an important farmers' union were dead against the bill. Mr. A. D. McLeod: What farmers' union?..

Sir Joseph Ward: The Hon Minister is not the sole representative of the farmers' unions; he has no presumptive right to speak for them all, and 1 do not understand why the Minister of Labour does not explain-the reason for what-he

wants to do. There is a tangle about this - bill. The Employers' Federation is opposing it strongly, and there is some talk of a conference about some "which is not in the bill. Sir Joseph added that the Government was surely not; going to drive the bill through Parliament against all this opposition. Mr. Eraser (Wellington South) accused the Prime Minister of treating the House in a' manner bordering on contempt in not explaining his reason for urgency. Mr. W. A. Veitch (Wanganui) supported the protest against the motion, and Labour members continued discussion, obviously filling in time. The Hon. W. Nosworthy demanded to know how the explanations required could be given when the opposition did not provide the Minister with a chance. "It looks as if a certain section is blocking this bill. It is very suggeshe added. < Mr. D. G. Sullivan advised the Minister not to be suspicious, the Minister retorting that the only thing to do with a contentious bill was to get down to business. A Minister was entitled to nave his bill reported. "Has Shell Shock."

Sir Joseph Ward: And we are entitled to know whether the Minister of Labour agrees the emasculation of his bill. Hon. Nosworthy: It is his infant, even "it has lost an arm. (Laughter). Mr. Lee (Auckland East): It has shell •hock. "ft will be questioned at every stage of the game," was one opinion byvMr. Parry {Auckland East), another contributor, to the hold-up. Three hours were occupied in discus-■ißg-suspension of the Standing Orders, *nd a division resulted in adoption of the motion by 53 votes to 14. Discuswon, on the main motion for adoption of Wport was agreed to, obviously as the result, of an arrangement between the Parties,-and the bill was set down for committal next sitting day.