Industrial Relations Bill

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 33063, 2 November 1972, Page 14

Industrial Relations Bill

Sir,—l am well aware of “X.U.K.’s” right-wing viewpoint and I have never been deluded into thinking that his views were in any way leftwing. What was laughable in his letter was his recommendation, in urging support of the right-wing objectives of the Industrial Relations Bill, to learn from the example of left-wing Soviet practice. Typical of the muddleminded thinking of the enemies of the trade union movement is “I.S.T.’s” endeavour to reconcile his description of the trade union movement, as “an organisation beneficial to its members and devoted to social justice,” with the demand that it “refrain from meddling in politics.” “Devotion to social justice” by the trade union movement must logically lead to “meddling in politics,” which is the right and duty of every citizen, including trade unionists. A politician, once, truly said that war was too important to be left to the generals; it is even truer that politics is too important to be left to the politicians.—Yours, etc., M.C.H. October 27, 1972.

Sir, —With monotonous regularity “M.C.H.” has shown his superficial understanding of the comprehensive structure of the New Zealand economy and, to reinforce an erroneous impression, he has drawn incorrect comparisons with a Russian economic character which exists only as a mythical manifestation of his imagination. First, as our harassed Government is only too painfully aware, the combined strength and influence of the trade union movement are powerful enough to negotiate wage increases with alarming success. The wage-price spiral, which has

been nourished by unreasonable demands on the part of some notorious unions, necessitated Government deflationary action. Fanners have long suffered at the merciless hands of the freezing workers’ union which, in relation to its size, wields a formidable influence on economic stability. As George Orwell poignantly observed, “People are equal, but some are more equal than others.” Nowhere more so than in Russia do those words apply. —Yours, etc., P.J.S. November 1, 1972.

Sir, —On pathetic delusions, “M.C.H.” offered one of his own: “the worker has only his trade union to protect his interests.” Supporting communism, he must welcome a red light unwelcome to supporters of parliamentary government. It flashes a warning that such government, having repeatedly had to accommodate itself to the wagebargaining, the strikes, and the union rat-race, will eventually have to accommodate itself to its own extinction, whether National or Labour. Government will be, by dictatorship, drawn from the ranks of the participants in the union rat-race. If Unionists are destined to be protected to this extent, the sooner they insist on remuneration authorities and industrial relations bills the better. Being “protected” is over-desired today, and rodent exploitation of this stultifying human weakness scuttles after it, even from the Communist and Mafialike holes of unionism. Take care, Jack and equal-pay Jill, going up the hill.—Yours, “A. B. CEDARIAN.” _ November 1, 1972. [This correspondence is now closed. —Ed., “The Press.’’]