"ONE BIG UNION"

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 250, 16 July 1920, Page 8

"ONE BIG UNION"

THE GOVERNMENT'S ATTITUDE UNCOMPROMISING OPPOSITION. "The Government will oppose anything in nature of the formation of tho 'one big union,"' said the Ministor of Labour (Sir William Herries) in the House of Representatives. Tho Bill before the House was an Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill, introduced by Mr. Savage, ■ Labour member for Auckland West, and ono of its provisions was as follows:— It shall he competent for any industry, trade, or calling to register a union which shall cover the whole of New Zealand in so far as tliat industry, trade, or calling is concerned. "As long as this Government holds the Treasury benches it is going to govern," continued Mr. Herries. "and it is not going to have any outside body telling it what it is to do. We see in Britain that big unions are attempting to die tate to the British Government on questions of general policy. We do not intend, as long as we are here—and I think tho House will support us—to have any outside body telling the House or the Government what it shall do.".

Mr. Holland (Buller): We will got rid of you some day. Sir William Uerries: Then tho honourable gentleman will he tho Government, and he will not allow anybody to distate to him. He wil find that if heis to carry the responsibility, he must havo the say. This Government intends io have the say. Mr. P. Eraser (Wellington Central) said the Bill did not deal with the "one big union" idea. It merely simplified procedure in connection with Dominion awards, and made it possible for such nn organisation as the Seamen's Union to meet on a national basis such an employer as the Union Steam Shipping Company. In any ease, the Government that attempted, in these days of trust* and nation-wide organisation of capital' ists and employers, to prevent the work, ers combining for tho protection of their own interests would be attempting an impossible task. Several other members 6poko briefly on the point. Mr. Luke (Wellington North) said that the organisation or the tramwaymen on a national basis had not proved beneficial to ally party, and Mr. D. Jones (Ivaiapoi) objected to power being placed in tho hands of a small group of workera in ono part of the country to form a union of national scope. Mr. E. J. Howard (Christchurch South) said that attempts to restrict the orgatisation of the workers within the Act had tho effect of driving the unions ontside the Act. Such attempts could not possibly prodnco any good results. Mr. Savage, in reply, said that his Bill was not intended to.create the "one big union," but if that form of organisation was good for the employers, it waß also good for the workera.

The Bill was referred to the Labour Bills Committee,