THE "UNITY" MOVEMENT,

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1777, 16 June 1913, Page 4

THE "UNITY" MOVEMENT,

We mentioned on Saturday last tho attitude of Me. David M'Laren towards the Unity movement as viewed by one of Labour's official newspapers. Tho journal referred to regarded Mr. M'Laren as a "disrupter," and spoko its mind 'very plainly concerning his conduct in making appeals to Labour, which, if they met with support, would mean the break-down of the Unity scheme. The national organiser of the United Labour Party, Mr. W. T. Mills, however, does not appear to take Mr. M'Laren over-seriously as a power to divert the unions from the course upon which tho great majority of their leaders are urging them to embark.. It seems that while Mr. M'Laren favours a "business arrangement," or some form of alliance with Sir Joseph Ward, there is 1 another Labour leader, Mr. Black, of Auckland, • who thinks Labour would have more to. gain from an alliance with Mr. Massey. And this is what the national organiser of tho United Labour Party thinks of tho influence of the two Labour leaders mentioned above:

Both Black and M'Laren together could not persuade a single trades union in New Zealand to formally adopt their proposals. It is true that Mr. Black's local branch is with him, while the branch of which Mr. M'Laren is a member is solidly against him. But, then, Black's branch hicets in Black's office, and can hold a session at any time, while H'Laren's branch $till meets at the-Trades Hall, and only once a week.

The national organiser may, of course, be wrong in his estimate of the influence which these gentlemen exercise in Labour circles, but so far as Mr. M'Laren is concerned, the impression has certainly been gaining ground that in Wellington at least he meets with more support outside of trades union circles than from within their ranks. The reason for this is perhaps to be found in his actions' as a member of Parliament and his general attitude in political affairs. Elected as a Labour representative, Mr. M'Laren early came under the sway of the "Liberal" Party. Ho did not, we believe, attend the caucus gatherings of the party, but his vote was so consistently recorded with the party that he came to be regarded by it as "safe." Moreover, he was not conspicuously successful in Parliament as an advocate of Labour's claims, and in the recent Mayoral election contest, in his anxiety, no doubt, not to alienate the support of bis old "Liberal" friends, was somewhat less enthusiastic about the Unity movement than he might have been. The national organiser of the United Labour Party probably voices the opinion of the great bulk of the Labour unions when he declares _ that Labour is not going to fetter itself with alliances or "business understandings" in the hope of scoring a temporary advantage, All the same, such suggestions as havo' been put forward by Me. M'Laren must have some effect in sowing, dissension. Presumably, the votes of the majority at the, coming conference will decide the course to be taken, and there iB little doubt that that vote will be in favour of Labour acting independently of all other parties. But is Mr. M'Laren, or anyone - else, pledged to loyally abide by that decision, or bo treated as a political opponent? If not, the great Unity scheme seems likely to be built on a somewhat shaky foundation.