Opposition Attempts To Delay Unionism Bill

Press, Volume C, Issue 29672, 16 November 1961, Page 14

Opposition Attempts To Delay Unionism Bill

(New Zealand .Press Association) WELLINGTON, November 15. The Government today applied the closure to end the debate on the Labour Bills Committee’s report on the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill.

The committee recommended that the bill proceed with some amendments and the bill has now been set down for the committee stage debate. The Opposition, fighting every stage of the biU, forced a division on the closure motion, but the Government carried it by 42 votes to 30. There was another division on the motion “that the committee’s report lie on the table.” The Government won this by 41 votes to 30.

Twenty-two members — eight Government, 14 Opposition—had spoken on toe committee’s report when the Minister of Transport (Mr McAlpine) moved the closure. The Speaker (Mr Algie) accepted the motion. He said he was satisfied there would be no breach of members’ rights. There had been a fair amount of repetition in the debate.

The Speaker had refused to accept the closure motion when it was moved yesterday. When the debate was resumed today, Mr H. L. J. May (Opposition. Onslow) said the committee's acceptance of the bill in the face of overwhelming evidence against it could lead to a weakening of New Zealand's Parliamentary system. “If the feeling goes abroad that the Government will go ahead regardless, no matter what evidence is presented to them, it will mean a break-down of Parliamentary committees as we know them.” he said. "This is a wrong move if we are to strengthen Parliament by making committees play a more vital part.” Mr May said unions, at present, had the right to abolish compulsory membership. “The majority. if they want it, can take a ballot and come out of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Mr A. J. Faulkner (Opposition. Roskill) termed the

measure a "busybody’s bilk” f He said opponents of the bill regarded it as "Government meddling” and “bringing too much Government into business.” The success of toe present system was being ignored. The committee was flying in the face of the weight of evidence.

? “Handling Dynamite” “I am sure the Government is not aware of the dynamite it is handling.” Mr Faulkner said. ‘The bill is utterly unrealistic. It is a definite step to smash workers’ organisations at a time when they should be built up.” The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Nash) said New Zealand had had 25 years of good industrial relations under the present legislation. “It seems inequitable that people who do not join unions and pay dues should get the same advantages as those who do.” he said. Mr Nash said the weight of evidence should be the determining factor in deciding what was to be done with the bill. “The decision to go ahead with the bill was obviously made before the evidence was heard. I am sorry the Government will not listen to the evidence,” he said. Employers’ Attitude Mr L. R. Adams-Schneider (Government, Hamilton) said the Opposition had claimed employers all opposed the bill. "But in evidence to the committee, the secretary of the Employers’ Federation,

Mr P. J. Luxford, admitted that some employers favoured voluntary unionism,” he said* The Master Builders* Federation opposed compulsory unionism and toe Retailers' Federation had always supported voluntary unionism. "The representative of the Master Grocers’ Association told the committee that most grocers’ assistants would not favour compulsory unionism. Mr Adams-Schneider said the bill would make for more vital, responsible and efficienttrade unionism. “When his mate joins an organisation, toe average New Zealander wants to join too—on a voluntary basis. But he rejects the principle of compulsion,” he said. The Public Service Association had more than 97 per cent, membership on a voluntary basis. "No association has done more for its members than the Public Service Association. That’s the sort of voluntary organisation the National Party is legislating for,” he said.