"Irresponsible Claim”

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29783, 28 March 1962, Page 14

"Irresponsible Claim”

WELLINGTON, March 27. Opening the Sheepowners' Industrial Union of Employer*’ case m the hearing of tine general wage order application today. Mr A. P. O'Shea said he could remember only one more irresponsible application to the Court —when the Court was asked to decide whether spreading jam on sponge cakes was skilled or unskilled work. The evidence of the applicants in the present case contained damning admissions.

Mr O'Shee commented that the only case he could find where a favourable verdict had been given m face of more damning evidence had been the acquittal of a horse stealer last century, because the jurors were personally fond of the accused’s lawyer.

The Federation of Labour submissions had quoted the Prime Minister as saying that the position in New Zealand was quite good, but Mr Holyoake had prefaced his most recent statement with the qualifying phrase “with prudent management’’ Was it prudent management to increase outgoings when there was uncertainty

(Neus Zealand Press Association)

about markets, and when it was necessary to borrow heavily to keep going? Mr O’Shea asked. Was it prudent management to increase outgoings, particularly in regard to capital works which might be necessary but were not necessarily productive? Mr O’Shea submitted Shat the answer to all those questions could only be “no.” On the other hand, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Nash) had recently said the rich countries including New Zealand—should capitalise the poor countries. If this was to be an effort by the people of New Zealand as a whole, Mr Nash apparently believed the wage-earners were in a position to make a contribution and must therefore be reasonably prosperous. Mr O'Shea contended that the Federation of labour admitted the unsatisfactory state of the economy. The Federation of Labour's submissions conceded that the dairy farmers bed received less tn the 1960-61 season than in the 1959-60 season, and evidence would show that no improvement was likely in 1961-62.

Evidence would aiso be called to show tha’ there would be a substantial drop in most sheepfarmers’ current incomes.

It would be shown that the present season had been almost disastrous, both physically and financially, for a large section of the sheep industry. There was "grave doubt” whether there had been any real increase in productivity Common Ground

“Under the circumstances ruling, the only ground upon which the application could succeed would be because of the increase m the cost of living, and this applies to all

sections of the community,” said Mr O’Shea. “In otheir wo>rds, workers, along with either sections of the community, must bear their share of the fall in real national income.

“Having regard to the above, a rise in wages at the present time would not ■promote the economic stability of New Zealand.’ as required by the Economic Stabilisation Act, and would therefore be contrary to the act under which the application is made.”

Development Of Markets

( N.Z. Press Association) WELLINGTON, Mar. 27. If a fraction of the cost of establishing and encouraging highly-protected highcost industries were devoted to expanding overseas markets, the gain would probably be much greater, Mr A. P. O’Shea, advocate for the Sheepowners’ Industrial Union of Employers, said when making submissions today in the Arbitration Court hearing of the application for a general wage increase. “It should be realised that the cost of establishing and encouraging manufacturing industry is borne by the whole community," he said. “On the other hand, the cost of expanding markets is expected to be borne almost entirely by the farmers.

“If increases in the national income brought about by expanded markets are expected to be shared by the whole community, should not the whole community share in the cost of achieving this expansion?”