SHOPS AND OFFICES BILL

Evening Post, Volume LXX, Issue 40, 16 August 1905, Page 5

SHOPS AND OFFICES BILL

IN COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE THE PREMIER'S VIEWS. A TANGLED SKEIN. The House of Representatives spent a . long night yesterday in discussing tha Shops and Officas Bill, which hai only recently been Teporfced on by fho Labour' Bills Committee. The purport of the amendments ' made by the Com mitt so has already been published. On the first clause, the Leadei of the Opposition said the Bill as amended would take the proverbial Philadelphia lawyer to understand, and ho could scarcely congratulate the Committee on the Tosult of its ■ labours. There- -was practically no early -closing provided in the Bill ; all .that was provided was that tha assistants must not bo employed after a certain time. The Bill applied to the country (towns as well as the large cities, and 'where the smaller ■places had not thenuselveß, under section 21 of tha original Act, fixed 'upon an houT lor closing, the assistants -would have to leave at 6 p.m. The Premier said he -wanted ' to "tell •the Leader of the Opposition and tha House, that if (the Bill did not go through, the law would remain as at present. The firet thing -was to repeal v , section 3 of the- Act of last year, and then paiG an Act Avhich -would conserve to assistants thsir fifty-two liDnrs a w&sk. He would rather osction 3 should remain as it is than interfere with the fifty-two hours a week. It had "been . attempted t» provide 'hat .the hour of closing should be midnight, and that assistants could be brought on at anj time 6o long as I hey did not work mor3 than the fifty-two hour 3 a week, There were people .who would do .thaj, to-morrow unless they lagielatsd against them. He was not altogether in accord •with the Bill as it stood at prsssnt, although ho should support rjasonably what the Labour Bills Committee proposed. He thought, however, that a closing hour for certain shops should ba provided. The taking away of tho shop assistants at- a certain hour would compel the closing of ths shops at .that hour. The Leader of .the Opposition pointed , ■out that in certain businesses it was npcsssary to work all night. In the Qo-vernm-en: Printing Office, for instance, men worked all night. Hon. W. Hall-Jones : Not the Sam* msn. 'Mr. 'Masssy r-atortod by expressing re-gr-sfc that tha Bill did not apply to Gov ernment Departments. The Premier retorted that Mr. MasseV waa confusing factories and shops. Th« Government had no shops. Mr. Arnold (Chairman of the Laboui Bills Committ-aa) eaid ths Committee hac taken evidence from every par.b of th« colony, and ths evidence wa6 now. before the House. All .that evidence vra& with .regard to the hour of closing for shops, and not as to ths hours for shop assistants. The Committee was igiablo. to agree as .to what <ihe closing houns' of shops should be. As to what tho Premier had said, the Bill empowered v shopkeeper to -work his employees till 12 o'clock at night, providing he did ;n<K> come under section 23 oi .the principal Act, and did not work them- more than fifty-two 'hours a week. ',- ' Mr. Barber complained that the evidence given before- ths Committee liad not be?n acted upon. The Committee did not understand the Bill, and he beIkved that the Commit"tes had been under the belief J,hat it regulated tho hours of closing. Not one member of the Committee undarstobd ths Bill -when it left the Committee, and this -was the. result. It would cause as innoh discoi-d as the Bill of laist session, not only ia the chief centres, but in the smaller; towns of the colony. It would be necas- • sary to apply section 21 of the Act b\ 1904 in order to get relief from the terms of this Bill. Assistants could io ( kept to the hour of closing fixed by the majority of the .trade under the provisions oi section 21. Mr. Ell said that a shopkeeper could petition under section 21 of the principal Act, and obtain power to keep his shop open f and his assistants working until 9 p.m., 10 p.m., or even midnight. In 'Mr. Bollard's opinion, the exemptions were all right as far as they went, but he could not see why a small shopkeeper should be compelled to close -his shop at 6 p.m.' if he" did not wish to- " Tho. onfe outstanding -fact in tha whole Bill " was pointed out by Mr. Taylor. This was tho declaration that fish were rabbits. It was the. one thing ithe Committee 4iad -done. Tho Committee 'had arrived at a conclusion that jte membera did not understand, and the result would be the same confusion as was evident last. year. As a mode of improvement he suggested a full discussion of the Bill, prefatory to reference back to the Committee for redrafting. As an anomaly of the- Bill, , he contended that certain oh-ops •with a fair number' of assistants' would Se able •to keep open until 10.3.0 p.m. or 11' p.m., and drag into late closing men ■who did not -want to close late. YVith certain necessaTy exemptions, 90 per cent, of tho remaining traders wanted the early closing, and desired only the modification of section 3 of laet year' 6 Act by means of exemptions. He was sure the Prepiier would agree that "it was a pity th'al last year's -Act had not been merely amended. Laet yeat's Act was very neaT to what was"Ava"rilea,'.'.and it was necessary to come do an agreement over a Bill thai would stand the' test of time, and that would obviate •the necessity of amending Bills for the next five of six years. After further debate, Mr. Aitktn said some of the -witnesses deseed .to work their assistants niOTe than fifty-two hours a, -week, but therVwas a great difference of opinion with regard' to the exemptions. 'Ho thought- that probably the wisest course would be to ©and the Bill back to tho Labour Bills Committee. " We have a Bill in which the principle of local option runs absolutely mad," was Mr. Tanner's comment on the Bill, and lie- pointed out a majority of traders could fix 11.30 p.m. as th© hour for closing in itheir district. At this point the Premier suggested that the House should deal with tha clauses, and .not indulge in generalities. ' ' I found the Labour Brills Committee in a tangle, and now they say I put them in a worse one," remarked Mr. Seddori. " I think that's about itrue," waa 'Mr» Tanner's retort. Mr. Duthio said people attached sa much, importance to this that they hndl come from all parts of the colony to give evidence. It waft impossible to reconcile all interests, and all that waa wanted was a half-holiday and a 52 hours week for assistants. Things went On all. right before the Act of lust session, and it watf not until the House took the matter in hand that all this trouble and turmoil took place. Tho whole of the evidence given by shopkeepers, said Mr. Alison, was in favour of there being no restriction as to the hour of closing Bhops. All thai, was wanted' Was to repeal section '3 and re-enact section 21 with certain exemptions. ■ ' • The Premier at length expressed tho opinion that this wns ft matter that should bo left to the shopkeeper* them« selves. They only required a few amendments iv section 21, nfld he suggested

that they bhoulrl reyval ifction 7> of tho principal Act- nnd' strike out all the other tfkusos of this Bill. (Hear, hear.) vi.«t »ou.u iu>.aii { ;.i*.u -1 v -iHen, time one shop could remain open, and another, having to discharge its assistWits, would have to shut, and then there ■would ,be a sqnabble. • • Later ott in the evening the Premier remarked that he brought down a simple Bill because ho knew that if they sent lip a 1 complicated Bill to the Legislative Cbuncir- that Chamber might insist on section 3 of the principal Act remaining, ■nd' then there would be trouble. „ Suggestions as to how the Bill should be amended came from every part of the Chamber, most of the speakers apparently -desiring- to- conserve the peculiar interests of the districts they' represent rather than' to look at the question from • ■national point of view. Clause 1 was-thenr-carried. "If the ehops~closev*at'. 6 o'clock the •eople at Island TJ&y\ "i&nnot get the Evening Post,"" '"was"' a- telling argument" brought forward by Mr. Barber. The House did -not quail, but the Premier gWve a lead by saying that if an, hour fcfclosihg was/fixed the shops in the suburbs -must suffer. -He thought they •hould not- do anything which would tend In 'th'at- direction", "-and he reckoned the time had , come. when they would want him'to gef them out" of their difficulty— w he ••prophesied -it would come when ho was "entertained" at the Druids'. Hall, (daughter,) ' ' . v ,' After two .hours' debate, most of which Was taken up .on clause 1, clause 2, repealing section 3- of the principal Act, •was carried. Cause '3" of ' the Bill as originally 1 brought down was,t)ien reached. Tho Premier^mqved '^o-Tnake the hour up to which assistants may be employed on Saturdays 'lO'~ p.m. .instead of 9 p.m. as originally 'prdposed." "Mr." Herries proposed a prior amendment providing that the clause should ofiily apply to the ' four centres. TKis" was," "he urged, " not a provision tliat should apply tq the country districts. This proposal, was greeted with cries of "No, no." > ' ■ ' Mr. Duthie objected to the proposal tEakthe clause Should be subject to any ward of^the" Arbitration, Court, holding that Parliament; should be superior to tho Court, and he moved, as a prior amendment, • that those words in the clause should be struck out. The Premier agreed . that the House should be supreme. He would support to make the hours less than 52 a week. It was pointed out by Mr. Wilford that such an amendment would operate very unfairly with regard to restaurantkeepers, whose assistants would -be compelled on the half-holiday to leave off work at 1 o'clock sharp, instead of being allowed to carry on under a workable award based on the requirements of the trade. When that award ran -out the restaurants " which now came under it would come under the Act, • and a hardship would be inflicted.' Such. -matters were better 'dealt with by the Arbitration Court. ■ . Several members concurred in the view that the fixing of the number of hours in a week's work should be left to the Arbitration Court and not fixed by Parliament.- It was pointed out by Mr. Aitken that the butchers worked under an award fixing' 56"hours as a working yrerk. ' Mr." 1 Arnold, while agreeing in this view in the main, thought that the Arbitration Court should not be allowed in the future to fix hours extending the working week's hours beyond the hours that might be fixed by the Act. After further debate Mr. Taylor moved to amend the clause in the direction ot making a 52 hour week apply only to those who are not affected by an Arbitration Court award. His object was 1 remake the clause more elastic — to give those who desired and needed a longer week than one of 52 hours the week they desired — and at the same time to protect those outside awards. After some discussion as to the best ■wording to ensure clarity, the suggestion made by Mr. Baume to the same effect as thaf moved by Mr. Taylor was put and lost on the voices. The Chainnaa then proceeded to put the amendment limiting the application of the danse to the combined city districts, but further discussion took place and -the end was farther delayed. -Mi, J. Allen "moved another amendment, with the idea of making the clause valueless, but the ■ Premier objected to this,, urging that the House should negative Mr. Herries's proposal,' and then he would drop the clanse. This statement raised a storm of protest Mr. J. Allen withdrew his amendment, Mr. Herries's amendment was negatived on the voices, and the Premier stated that he intended to bring down an amendment to provide against the practice of bringing back assistants to work all hours of the night on the late nijrht. Mn Taylor contended 'that if something was not done in the direction of fixing the hour- of- closing on Satucday night, some 'means "would be taken to keep shop assistants at work until 12 o'clock on the Saturday night. The Premier said his proposal would he to prevent shop assistants working aftftr. 3 .olqlockjon; ordjnary nights and 10 o'clock" on Saturday nights.. _ 1 • Glaase S-waa struck .out on, the, voiceg. ' SIT J. Allen then raised the question (on clause.j}),as Jo.whether any alteration •was to 'be* -made --in- -section 21 of the principal Act relating to the majority of shopkeepers who' should limit the hours of closing. "MX Barber moved to provide that the majority required be three-fifths, but was ruled -out of order at that stage. The Xea'def of the Opposition moved 1 to the "same" effect',' but- in a- different; jn.anner. , ' At tbis-stage — midnight— the solitude of the' Premier" in fighting 'his" Bill through Committee was the most significant feature of the evening's discussion. Not a single Minister occupied the Treasury benches, and only one Government Whip was' present "on the back benches. Ho>teyer, that defect was made up by a fujl 1 attendance of the Tank and file on both sides of the House, "despite some big gaps here and there, and even at that' late, hour there' was a decidedly interested audience in the' public gallery The question of the three-fifths versus j a- bare majority on the question of the closing hour was debated at length, and - the action of the Premier in sacrificing clause 3 was freely commented on by Bomc members. The small shopkeeper, too, who had been ruined by compulsory early closing was brought before the House in all his abject poverty, and the fight raged furiously till 1 a.m., when Mr Taylor moved to report progress. By 36 to 29 the House decided to go on, and at 1.15 Mr. Massey's three-fifths amendment was carried- by 36 to 28. "I think we'd better go home," said Mr. Ell, and he moved to report progress. The 'Premier said if clause 4 was passed be would be prepared to go home, and 'te wa» followed by Mr, Laurrnson, who •aid lie would be prepared to do all in ois power to prevent the passage of the Bill in its present form. .The motion to report progress was lost »n the voices, clause 4 was passed, and on the Premier's motion tho House, then agreed to go home..