PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 145, 15 March 1932, Page 10

PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

Arbitration Law Revision Attacked LABOUR MOVES AMENDMENT TO BILL Effort to Retain Compulsory Arbitration (From Our Parliamentary Representative.) There was every expectation in the lobbies at one stage yestei Jav ttal the hX7 of Representatives would reach a dtvston on the second reading of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill. However, the further participation of Government speakers when the House resumed in the evening after the week-end adjournment for,the first Monday sitting of the session, ■ was an indication that there was no immediate desire to dispose ° f were current in the evening that the Opposition intended that it be redrafted in order to presedve the essential features of Ise Zealand arbitration law—namely, compulsory arbitration where trial disputes were not settled in conciliation council. lh J < Party had almost exhausted its speakers for the second reding • but thev have been given new life by the amendment, which will enable hem all to talk again if they wish. It is perfectly obvious that the •imendment has been drafted with ingenuity in that it throws open the whole of the arbitration system for renewed discussion, thus f lvI “S Opposition a freedom it would not enjoy from an amendment confined to narroWylimits. Houge > listened to the speeches 'in the evening, and throughout the four hours’ sitting there was seldom more than halfthe full attendance of 80. Sometimes even fewer than half were in their places Many had not returned from their homes after the week-end. and this mav have accounted for the lack of real desire to push the business Even the Prime Minister was willing that at least one Labour ' member should say all he wanted to, and he> took what was for him the unusual course of securing an extension of time fot Mi. E. J. How aid so that he could make a last-minute addition to his remarks However, accepting the concession in the spirit in which it was given, Mr. Howard did not abuse the privilege. The Bill was subjected to a general condemnation by the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. H. E. Holland, and he was. followed by the Minister of Public Works. Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates, who incidentally mentioned that the Bill was favoured by the Government partly because it would enable the policy of readjustment to be carried out quicker than would be possible if a review were undertaken by the Arbitration Court. Now that the second reading is fairly under way, the Prime Minister told the House at t>he adjournment that it will be taken to its completion before anything else is done. ' »

ARBITRATION LAW Opposition’s Attack MR. HOLLAND’S VIEW “Destroying Conditions” An attack on the provisions of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill was made by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. H. E. Holland, when the second reading debate was resumed in the House last evening. He opposed the Bill on the ground that it would destroy Working conditions as they existed to-day and result in wage-earners being denied any legal protection which they might have to-day. Mr. Holland said Government members, irrespective of the consequences of the last 10 per cent, cut, had urged in their speeches that wages would have to come down. This statement, -which was strangely in conformity with a statement issued by the Employers’ Federation, made him wonder how far i 'it .was proposed to reduce wages, and what figure would be considered the irreducible minimum. The fact that a fortnight very often separated a man and his wife from starvation seemed to be quite overlooked, and bad as was the plight of the farmer, he considered the . position of the wage-earner was infinitely worse. Capital and Labour, The Bill, Mr. Holland said, was but a phase in a long series of fights between Capital and Labour in this country. The Labour Party had attacked the machinery of the Arbitration Act when it had been found that this machinery had been manipulated against the working class. The changing of economic conditions changed also’ the viewpoint of the employers toward the court, with the result that when times were bad they desired do bring wages down to the lowest possible figure. It was this outlook which had prompted Mr. W. Goodfellow to suggest that wages in this country should be reduced to 8/- a day. Mr. Holland recalled certain words, of Mr. W. Pember Reeves, and Mr. S. G.~ Smith (Govt., New Plymouth) interjected : “That was 40 years ago.” Mr. Holland: Yes; but I am trying to tell the honourable member, who is thinking in terms of 100 years ago, the sentiment of the times. Mr. Smith: Bo you still believe in the Labour leg-irons? Mr. Holland: The hon. member is legironed to the Reform Party at the present time. Earlier Troubles. Continuing, Mr. Holland reviewed briefly the history of industrial arbitration in New Zealand. Recalling the early 'nineties, when the maritime strike occurred, he said the Government of that day, which was the equivalent of the Government of to-day, did not hesitate to 'use existing legislation and enact more for the use of the employers. The reactions were reflected in the formation of the Liberals and the enactment, after several rejections by the Upper House, of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act. The early operations of the court, however, did not inspire the workers with , confidence in the system. Several strikes occurred simply because ridiculous conditions were imposed on the men. Coalminers. for example, were forced to eat their lunch in 15 minutes, while the members of the court who issued the dictum took two hours off for theirs. The Waihi and Huntly strikes, featuring bogus unions set up by Government assistance against the men, left their trail of disaster and heavy loss of life. Strangely enough, the men who were today seeking the abolition of the Arbitration Court had, at the time of the 1913 strike, armed themselves with batons—and weapons of a more dangerous character 4 —to force the workers back to work and uphold the court. The time had been chosen by the employers and by the authorities for a conflict: and illegal methods had been adopted to achieve their purpose. While it was in their interests to enforce the conditions of the court in 1913, the same men were prepared '• to waive the court to-day because they believed they could get better conditions without it. Juries had been deliberately nacked and decisions had been obtained -.hich otherwise would, not have been Circumstances, like those shown by 'his historical record, made one underhand why the wage-earners at that time did not possess confidence in the court, nor indeed in the employers. This particular Bill would lengthen the hours of labour, and the-natural consequence would be the displacement of greater numbers of men from industry. He advocated shorter hours. Forty years ago he had opposed the court, and if similar circumstances arose he would do the same to-day. The Government to-day was not acting On its own volition, but the members were voicing the opinions . of the Employers’ Federation. He appealed to the House to destroy the Bill at the first opportunity.

“FACING THE FACTS” Mr. Coates Defends Proposals NEED FOR THE BILL “The Government believes it is absolutely essential to face the facts, and that the sooner we do that the better,” declared the Minister of Public Works, Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates, when defending the Industrial Conciliation aud Arbitration Amendment Bill in the House of Representatives last evening. Mr. Coates said there wore two sections of the community definitely -harassed by the conditions existing at the present time. In the first place, there were the unemployed, who were worse off than anyone else in the country. Mr. J. A. Lee (Lab., Grey Lynn) : And nothing has been done for them. . Such a statement, said Mr. Coates, was tjuite incorrect. A great deal had been done for the unemployed, and more still would be done, but the Government’s efforts were controlled by those in a position to supply the funds that were utilised for the relief of unemployment. The other section which was suffering was the farming community. Unless the farmer was in a position to make a success of his industry others would not be able to prosper. They could not get past the fact that the national income had fallen from £150,000,000 in 1929 to an estimated £90.000.000 in the year to come. That was a fact that the Labour speakers appeared to have overlooked. Not Employers’ Measure. Mr. Coates denied the allegation of Labour members that the Bill had been brought in to hit the worker, and that the proposals in the measure were to satisfy the Employers’ Federation. He for one had not seen the comment of the Employers’ Federation on the Bill. How did Labour suggest it was possible immediately to readjust ourselves in respect of payment for the services of labour with a reduced national income and the altered conditions the country was experiencing? He had been authoritatively informed that it would take not less than two years for the Arbitration Court to go over the conditions of all industries and consider their capacity to meet the changed set of circumstances. Costs and conditions had to be brought into alignment with the reduced income of the primary producers. It would take over two years to bring about the readjustments the Government believed to be necessary if industry were to be placed on a sound footing and unemployment reduced. It had been said that unscrupulous employers would set the lead and that others would be forced to follow. If bad employers were to dominate the position the Government would not take long to rectify that state of affairs. No man would stand for unwholesome conditions. To-day’s conditions were vastly different from those existing two years ago. It was a matter of speed and of how quickly they could readjust themselves to the changed conditions. Mr. W. Nash (Lab., Hutt) : This Bill was drafted word for' word two years ago. Camouflaged Hostility.

Mr. Contes said there was much camouflaged hostility to the Bill, particularly by small trades union men. but they need not be apprehensive. The fear of those opposing the Bill was that “the bad Greek would chase the good Greek out.” Referring to clause two, whereby any specified industries or persons might be excluded from the operation of the Act. Mr. Coates said that if abuse were to follow the proposal—he did not believe it would —then some right would have to be taken by the Crown to prevent the misuse of the provision. A lot of overtime was not fitting in witli present conditions. Industry could not afford existing wages for work done. It was necessary to adjust wages and adjust conditions. Conditions demanded that they should immediately face the facts. The Government believed it was absolutely essential to face the facts and that the sooner that was done the better. ESSENTIAL POINT Compulsory Arbitration LABOUR AMENDMENT The Labour Party’s amendment to the second reading motion was submitted in the House last night by Mr. J. McCombs (Lab., Lyttelton), at the end of a speech in which he traced the origin of the existing legislation and quoted opinions regarding its value. The text of the amendment is as follows: — “Whereas the original legislation embodying the principle of legal settlement of industrial disputes took three and a half years to put on the Statute Book : “That whereas the originator of the Act, the Hon. W. Pember Reeves, insisted that the legislation would be worse than useless unless it provided for finality in the settlement of disputes: “That whereas the experience, of the past 37 years lias proved tlie soundness of the originator’s central idea : “That whereas the Prime Minister, during the recent general election period gave a definite assurance that it was not the intention of the Government to destroy the Arbitration Act: , . , . “That whereas the proposed legislation

will in fact destroy ths very foundation of our arbitration system by destroying compulsory arbitration: , “That whereas the interest of the whole community, including employers and employees, can best be safeguarded and maintained by the legal establishment of some tribunal to give final decision in the event of disagreement between the parties: “The Bill be referred back to the Government with a recommendation that it be redrafted in order to preserve the essential features of New Zealand arbitration law, namely, the settlement of industrial disputes by compulsory arbitration where in the small percentage of industrial disputes settlement is not arrived at by agreement or conciliation. Mr. A. Stuart (Govt., Raugitikei) said the wage-earners had been well treated during the period of prosperity; wages had been increased and all -sorts of facilities were extended to them, but now the money was not in the country something had to be done to meet the situation. Under the Arbitration Act the good workman was dragged down to the level of the inferior worker. The Arbitration Court was a protection for the man not prepared to do a fair days work. He admitted there were unscrupulous employers, but it had also to be remembered there were unscrupulous workers. He believed it was necessary to have the Arbitration Act amended to meet the present situation. He was a great believer in a fair day s vi-age for a fair day’s work. Unless the' Arbitration Act were amended so that employers could pay wages at rates they could afford, the number of unemployed would increase. Mr. P. Fraser (Lab.. Wellington Central) said the object of the Bill was to bring about a more expeditious method of wage reduction. Everyone admitted the farmer was having .a bad time, but he would not be saved from bankruptcy by pushing the worker down.

GALATEA ESTATE Dismissal of Workmen RETURN TO HOMES The dismissal of a number of workmen at the Galatea Estate, near Bay of Plenty, where developmental work has been in progress for some time, was mentioned in an urgent question addressed to the Minister of Public Works, Rt. Hon. ,T. G. Coates, by Mr. R. Semple (Lab.. Wellington East), when the House met last evening. . Mr. Semple drew attention to the fact that the families of the men concerned were in another part of the island. He asked whether the Minister intended these families to remain isolated, and whether he would’consider paying the expenses of the dismissed men to enable them to return to their homes, or alternatively supply them with other employment. , , The Minister said it had already been announced that Public Works activities would have to be curtailed on account of the cessation of borrowing overseas. In this instance the men concerned had been constantly employed by the department for several years, and their services were being dispensed with owing to progress that had been made at Galatea in rending and other work. Their families were on the Gisborne-Waikokopu section of the East Coast railway, but he could not se,e his way dear to pay the travelling expenses of the men in order to enable them to return home.