The Dominion WEDNESDAY, MARCH 28, 1923. LABOUR’TYRANNY IN NEW SOUTH-WALES

Dominion, Volume 16, Issue 163, 28 March 1923, Page 6

The Dominion WEDNESDAY, MARCH 28, 1923. LABOUR’TYRANNY IN NEW SOUTH-WALES

At a caucus meeting of the New South Wales Labour Party held, ten days ago further instructive light was thrown upon the inner workings of a movement organised ostensibly to benefit the workers. The caucus met to consider a demand by the State executive of the party that the Labour representatives in Parliament should endorse its action in expelling Mr. Dooley, and accept as their new leader Mr. J. J. G. McGirr.

The executive is appointed by an annual conference of delegates representing Labour organisations in New South Wales. Its action was thus definitely an attempt by an irresponsible outside body to impose its will upon elected members of Parliament. In the outcome, a minority section of the party, headed by Mr. J. J. G. McGirr, submitted itself to the' dictation of the State executive. A majority of the members of the party supported Mr. Dooley in refusing to recognise the right of the executive to control thq parliamentary party. . An apologist for the executive (Mr. Minahan) made some remarkable claims on its behalf. As he is reported by the Sydney Morning Herald, he contended that

tho executive was possessed of plenary powers, and could tnko any action it liked. He did not agree that it should possess those powers, because it meant that the executive was omnipotent. It had the power, however, and in expelling Mr. Dooley hud exercised it in a legitimate way.

Another member (Mr. McClelland) denied the right of the executive to expel Mr. Dooley. He credited it, however, with extraordinary powers. “It seemed,” he said, “an anomaly that the executive, by a majority of one vote, could expel the whole [Parliamentary] party, if it thought fit, justly or unjustly. It could also interpret the platform and force u’pon members of the party a new platform.” The feeling of the party was tested on a motion that Mr. Dooley be. asked to leave the caucus room—a motion denounced by one of Mr. Dooley’s supporters as an attempt by the executive to stifle'free speech.' On a division the motion was defeated by 16 votes to 13. It.subsequently appeared, however, that the section of the party headed by Mr. Dooley numbers 24 members, and the McGirr section 10, while the attitude of three members is uncertain. A split in the McGirr section has since been reported by cab/egram. These events may do something to expedite tho cleansing of tho Australian Labour movement which Labour leaders in ■ Federal and State politics have declared to bo necessary. Much-needed publicity in any case has been given to the fact that in New South Wales (as in some other countries, not excluding our own) the Labour movement has been used as a cloak for the establishment and exercise of a tyranny which flouts and violates the most essential principles of democracy. . The issue that is being fought in New South Wales is perfectly plain. As ah Australian commentator observed the other day, it is whether, in tho event of Labour again attaining office,

tho real government of the' country shall be in the hands of the fleeted representatives of the people, or in th© hands of those who. attain a position of mastery in the Labour movement by methods entirely foreign to our Constitution;’methods which have no official regulation; and methods which, according to Messrs. Catts and Dooley (expelled), and Messrs. Gardiner and Charlton (as yet unexpelled), have assumed a questionable and sinister character.

Tho tyranny of the New South Wales State Labour executive is directed meantime against Labour representatives in Parliament of whom'it has fallen foul. The attempts of this oligarchy to outlaw Mr. Dooley and others are, however, merely detail steps towards a much greater achievement. The ultimate object plainly is to establish an autocratic and tyrannical control over the Government and Parliament, and' therefore over the people who elect Parliament. All the essential facts are in plain sight, and tKey aro of much more than local interest to New South Wales. Labour executives elected by annual conferences of Labour organisations are .only in a limited and doubtful sense representative. Notoriously, such bodies arc little amenable to control by the unions and other organisations'they are supposed to represent. They aro the happy hunting ground of cranks, fanatics, and self-advertisers. The lino of political evolution in British countries is one of expanding democracy. The hardly-disguised aim of Labour organisations like the New South Wales executive is to reverse this progress and substitute for rule of the people by the people a secret and irresponsible tyranny. , •