Income-policy hint from Minister

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32775, 27 November 1971, Page 2

Income-policy hint from Minister

(New Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON, November 26. There was a need for a continuing incomes policy after the expiry of the Stabilisation or Remuneration Act on June 30 “if not before,” the Minister of Labour (Mr Marshall) said in Parliament today.

Speaking during the third-reading debate of the Stabilisation of Remuneration Amendment Bill, Mr Marshall said that this was already under discussion between the Federation of Labour, the Employers’ Federation and the Government.

The Government had in mind the development of a new proposal which would provide for concepts of stabilisation to be established on a permanent basis, in the interests of an. The Opposition continued its attack on the bill today, but it passed its third reading.

The bill makes it clear that Arbitration Court awards come under the jurisdiction of the Remuneration Authority when they exceed the guideline. Mr N. V. Douglas (Lab., Auckland Central) said that the act had failed to overcome or affect in any material way the serious inflationary situation which existed today—a direct result of the Government’s failure to manage the economy. P.M. speaks Entering the debate for the first time, the Prime Minister (Sir Keith Holyoake) said that the Government had taken action against a worldwide inflationary trend sooner than most other countries.

This was why Parliament had been called together early this year, to bring in the bill which placed some re-

straint on wages and incomes. At the same time the Government had widened the scope of price control. Sir Keith Holyoake said that every member of the House believed that the principle of stabilisation, and the jurisdiction of the Remuneration Authority applied to every award adjudicated by the Arbitration Court. As a result of a Supreme Court ruling on a technicality, the bill had been brought in to make it clear that this was so.

Sir Basil Arthur (Lab., Timaru) said that bringing in the bill could only undermine the discussions between the Employers’ Federation and the Federation of Labour, seeking a formula for better industrial relations.

‘Unrest encouraged’

Mr E. E. Isbey (Lab., Grey Lynn): The Government has given the Court of Arbitration its marching orders. More than 7500 workers in the pulp and paper industry were contemplating another two-day stoppage, he said. The Government was encouraging this type of industrial action by persevering with its legislation. Dr A, M. Finlay (Lab., Henderson), referring to comments by the Minister of Labour, that he had obtained the views of the Arbitration Court on the proposed amendment, asked whether this was the view of the Court as a whole, or of a minority of the three-member Court.

In reply, Mr Marshall said

that he did not know whether the Judge of the Arbitration Court had consulted the Other members of the Court