Stop-Work Meetings

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31323, 20 March 1967, Page 12

Stop-Work Meetings

Sir,—We have seen “government by poster” in China. The Federation of Labour is attempting to introduce “government by stop-work meetings.” Mr Skinner wants to develop industry and increase production. His method is to ask all workers in the four largest cities to stop work for

four hours. Hitler and Mussolini harangued mass meetings. Mr Skinner is trying to emulate them. The two dictators did not tolerate debate or the dissentient vote. The masses supported their proposals or remained silent. This procedure was required by Mr Skinner at Carlaw Park, Auckland. Fifteen or 20,000 people at a rally could not be unanimous about anything. But all opposition to his proposals was stifled. This is the complete negation of democracy. It must now be apparent to everyone that the Federation of Labour is the alternative to the present Government, and not the Labour Party. God forbid that Mr Skinner should be the next Prime Minister of New Zealand!— Yours, etc., STUART JEFFERY. Motueka, March 14, 1967.

Sir, —The stop-work meetings, the biggest labour gatherings for 35 years, were a great victory for the wage and salary earners. They showed the Government that the lower income bracket is not going to pay for the economic mess, whle those for whose benefit the mess was created, big business, pay nothing. The Federation of Labour is weak and useless without rank-and-file support. Its policy and action can only be guided by the rank and file, so those who have opposed the federation should go to the branch meetings. That is the place to disagree, not in letters to the paper. The stop-work meetings were to put the leadership’s views to the rank and file (democracy). The loss of production is nothing compared with the Government’s action of cutting imports, internal spending and overtime, and creating unemployment, which will amount to millions of hours in loss of production.—Yours, etc P. G. SUTTON. March 18, 1967.

Sir,—l agree with “Hypo-crite-Hater” that there are many time-wasting pursuits which should be confined to after-work hours, but these are not the subject of the present controversy. It is not only the loss of production time which concerns me. I feel that attempts to hinder the effective functioning of a government, elected by the people, are not to be encouraged. In some countries they would be regarded as treason. I have been unjustly accused of being an apologist for the Government. I did not even vote National at the last election, but I am not too oneeyed to give credit where it is due. The abolition of subsidies was long overdue.— Yours, etc., GROW UP OR GO UNDER. March 18, 1967. Sir, —Where bigoted and sheep-like “workers” Jore down a peaceful demonstrator’s placard, though they tenaciously defend their own right to lose pay and stop production, their feeble, onetrack minds cannot appreciate that it is a democratic privilege for other people to object. The Federation of Labour is nothing but a pressure group determined to disorganise production and regiment, the poor, silly, gutless workers. Any way, who are the “workers”? Those, I presume, who spend more time on strikes than they do in good honest labour.—Yours, etc., D. March 17, 1967.