F.O.L.’s response to P.M. tepid

Press, 9 May 1985, Page 1

F.O.L.’s response to P.M. tepid

By

PATRICIA HERBERT

in Wellington

The message the Prime Minister, Mr Lange, gave the Federation of Labour conference yesterday was not to expect any U-turns in the Government’s economic policies. He also ruled out any possibility that this year’s award round would be abandoned in favour of a series of general wage orders, a course some have advocated.

The new wage-bargaining system should be given a fair trial, he said.

Mr Lange gave a candid and rather brave address, given the depth of disenchantment now racking the trade union movement. This was expressed in interjections and in the tepid response both he and the Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Palmer, received. The customary standing ovations, at arrival and departure, failed when only half the delegates got to their feet. Mr Lange said the economy was beginning to turn round. He quoted the creation of 40,000 more jobs this year as evidence. “The future prospects are bright. For the first time in years there really is light on the horizon,” he said. “However, we have a way to go yet. The way there is not without pain and requires a continuing shortterm sacrifice from everyone in this country, including the paid workforce.” He said the feeling in union circles that the working people were being asked to carry an unfair share of the burden was not supported by the facts and that the rest of the community was also being asked to exercise restraint.

This provoked cries of “Who? Who?” from the floor. Mr Lange said farmers and superannuitants had taken a cut in their incomes and that, in spite of

what the delegates might think, the business sector had not got off scot-free. They had lost export incentives, had been hit by increased State charges, and would soon face the fringe benefits tax — changes which together would mean that last year’s bumper profits would not be repeated in 1985-1986, he said.

“What about the workers?” he was asked.

“I want you to start feeling that other people are making a contribution,” Mr Lange said. “I would not tell you that the present situation of the low-paid is as we would like it to be. Obviously it is not but we have not been ignoring the needs of these people.” He quoted the Family Care package*and the increased housing vote as evidence of the Government’s continuing commitment to the social wage and said this concept had been too readily dismissed by some in the trade union movement.

Mr Lange said the goods and services tax was a key element in the reform of the taxation-benefit system — earning a small hiss from a handful of delegates. He acknowledged that there was some concern about GST but said he was convinced the Government “could deliver” to make people better off. He reminded the conference that no other political party could represent union concerns, and asked for patience. Labour had been in office for less than 10 months and had not had time to effect change of the scope required. “Your judgment as to our performance must necessarily be reserved at this stage,” he said. Mr Lange was followed by Mr Palmer who reminded the F.O.L. that this time last year it had been coping with the wage freeze

and voluntary unionism. He then outlined the provisions of the Union Membership Bill.

But the warmest applause was saved for the F.O.L. president, Mr Jim Knox, who tempered his vote of thanks by saying that wage and salary earners had suffered enough and that it was time they were shown some thought.

He said the union movement had no intention of divorcing itself from the Government and that it wanted Labour kept in power. But it was concerned about present economic policies and an apparent failure to consult. “We have a voice and we feel that our voice ,is being ignored,” Mr Knox said. “If you are not working the way we want you to, we will continue to bring pressure on you to see that you do. I feel that the time is now here for us to get the justice we should get.” He then gave Mr Lange a copy of the resolution calling for an immediate wage adjustment and a copy of his presidential address. “It does not hit you too hard at all,” he said. “It is fair criticism and I hope that it is regarded as such.” Further reports, page 4