WILL LANG WIN?

Auckland Star, Volume LXVII, Issue 151, 27 June 1936, Page 22

WILL LANG WIN?

PARTY CIVIL WAR. FEUD WITH "GARDENITES." OVER NEW LABOUR PAPER. (From Our Own Correspondent.) SYDNEY, June 18. Within the past few days a remarkable situation has developed at the Trades Hall out of the conflict still in progress between Mr. Lang and Mr. Jock Garden. The present antagonism between these two old friends and allies started some months ago with a vigorous attempt by Mr. Lang and the Inner Group to gain control of the Labour broadcasting station 2KG. Mr. Lang wanted it for propaganda purposes, but it has been for years virtually in the hands of Mr. Harden and his friends, who represent the industrial factor in the Labour party as distinct from the political element. The Langites expected to oust Mr. Garden easily, but the industrial unions, recovering from their surprise, rallied round him, out-voted the Langites at a critical juncture, and finally reconstructed the management of 2KG in such a way as to exclude the Langites altogether. Beaten on this issue, Mr. Lang attacked Mr. Garden from another point of vantage. Certain charges had been brought against Mr. Garden by the executive council of the State A.L.P. accusing him of disloyal and disruptive criticism of the action of the Langite delegates at the Melbourne Unity Conference earlier in the year. These charges were held in abeyance till the Langites saw how the struggle over 2KG was likely to go. When they realised that they had been defeated on this issue, Mr. Lang and the Inner Group pressed the charges, the executive council held them proven and solemnly expelled Mr. Garden from the party. The "Labour Daily." Meantime Mr. Lang, findino- that he could not get control of 2KY, decided to strengthen his grip on the other important organ for propaganda, the "Labour Daily." The Inner Group drafted* a scheme for the reorganisation of the "Labour Daily," issuing more shares and thus increasing the capital. Several of the most important unions demurred, and Messrs. Sclireiber and King, two of the most influential unionists in the State, published a manifesto, pointing out, on the terms proposed, it would be easily possible for the Langites to gain complete control of the paper and use it as they pleased.

The leading unions therefore declared against the scheme, more especially because the "Labour Daily" has over £30,000 of uncalled capital at its disposal, which it could utilise for reorganisation without issuing, a single new share. The opposition of the unions meant that this project became impossible.. The Langites, however, had been working hard against Mr. Garden in other directions, and with considerable success. The party lias been well disciplined, and the Inner Group at the Trades Hall pulled the strings so cleverly for Mr. Lang that Mr. Garden found himself unable to secure enough support for a special confcrence, which lie wished to get convened to discuss his expulsion and if possible to reinstate him in the movement. So that up to ten days ago Mr. Garden's chances of success seemed to be diminishing, and even the "Sydney Morning Herald," which has watched the progress of the fight with sardonic interest, admitted reluctantly last week, that Mr. Langmight win after all. Lang Bombshell. Then came another bombshell exploded by Mr. Lang in the Labour camp. The "Labour Daily" of June II announced that, at a meeting of union delegates, it had been decided to issue a Sunday paper entitled the "Sunday Express," that arrangements were being made to finance it, and that the success of the venture was already assured. It is well known that the Labour party has long wished to possess a Sunday newspaper and that it is favoured as "likely to prove an effective counterblast to the "Capitalist Press." Mr. Lang's proposal was at once interpreted as an attempt to secure by indirect means the complete control of the State Labour propagandist organ, and thus to repair the defeats that he had sustained in the matter of 2KG, and the rejection of his scheme for the increase of th'e "Labour Daily's" capital. The industrial section of the party became at once suspicious and apprehensive.

"Truth,' which has a bitter standing feud with the "Labour Daily," at once questioned the feasibility of the scheme, pointing out that the meeting which decided to float the "Sunday Express" was secret, that the delegates were "hand-picked," that there was 110 prospect of financing the venture, and that the stronger unions—representing 28,000 shares out of 34,000 held by unions in the "Labour Daily" —oppose the project. The Langite organ replied to "Truth" with even more than its usual virulence and volubility, and meantime the powerful unions which had so far held aloof, proceeded to consider the situation. Sunday Paper Proposal. A further stage in the progress of the fight was reached last night, when Mr. G? C. McGrath, M.L.C., Federal secretary of the Printing Employees' Union, and once a close friend and ally of Mr. Lang, issued a circular to tlie trade unions condemning the, Langite methods by which they propose to issue a Sunday Labour paper. The chief objection put forward by Mr. McGrath to the project is that "the new company formed to control the pioposed organ has been brought into being not by any demand from the unions, but by the connivance of politically interested persons,' and he also urges the, unions not to be attracted by spectacular but ill-considered proposals" which will inevitably mean heavy financial loss for all concerned. TJie reference to political influence and the side-hit at Mr. Lang and the inner group arc, of course, most ; significant. But Mr. McGrath is evidently anxious not to put the question .simply on a personal basis, and the rest of his circular taverses quite different ground. It points out, first, that the new company which is being formed to issue the Sunday paper is a separate company having 110 connection, direct or indirect-, with the "Labour Daily," and Mr. McGrath regards this as a grave disadvantage. Comment By Mr. McGrath. '"'Wherever you have two papers independently controlled they will disagree, just as two rival political Labour organisations, within our recent experience, have been seen to disagree. The trade union movement would hold strongly ■ hostile views to any proposal to creata

■two unions in an industry where one was functioning- well. If two companies are in agreement on everything 1 — policy, stall's, the use of plant, organisation— one is not necessary. If they are not in agreement, one spells disaster to the other and to unity in the Labour movement. Business men would not issue a Sunday paper on other than a business basis, and you cannot afford to issue it on any other."

Thus adroitly shifting his attack from the personal to the commercial side. Mr. McGrat'h has disarmed liis critics in advance, and has made a powerful appeal to the unions to safeguard their own finances. No doubt his circular will produce a considerable impression on the older and large unions, but it must not be forfgotten that in effect 'he has ranged himself on the anti-Lang side in the light now convulsing the Town Hall, and has made still more dubious the answer to the Labour question of the hour—will Lang win ?