NATIONAL SERVICE

Evening Post, Volume XCV, Issue 89, 15 April 1918, Page 3

NATIONAL SERVICE

ANOTHER NEED OF

WAR

IMPORTANT NEW BILL

MOBILISING LABOUR

FOR ESSENTIAL WORK.

One of the surprises of the. comprehensive Finance Bill on Saturday in the House of Representatives was the introduction of a "national service" clause on a supplementary order paper. A very far-reaching legislative principle— practically conscription of men for essential civilian work was embodied in a few short paragraphs, modestly termed clause. As submitted on Saturday, the clause proposed power for the Governor-Gen-eral in Council, by the War Regulations Apt, "having regard to the exigencies of the present war or the conditions created thereby," to make provision for the following purposes :— (a) Procuring, exacting, enforcing, controlling, and regulating national service during the war.' (b) Prohibiting or ' restricting any service, employment, occupation, business, work, or /industry. (c) Regulating the remuneration of national service subject to the provisions of the Arbitration Act, or awards or agreements under the Act. ■ National service is defined as "all service, employment, occupation, business, work or industry (whether under the Crown or any other" employer, or independent of any employer . . . deemed to be essential to the public welfare, and includes not merely perisonal service but also the use of any factory, workshop, business premises, machinery, plant, or appliances essential to public welfare," except military serA PLEA FOB TIME. Mr. Hindmarsh requested that the clause should be deferred for further! consideration till, members had had an opportunity to study 1 the details. It was hardly fair to the House to submit such a clause without a comprehensive explanation. He asked that the matter should be held over till 7.30 p.m. Mr. Payne said that if a big industrial fight was wanted the , Government could not get it in a better way than with this clause. ■ Mr. Forbes said that the Government should indicate which Department would act on such a clause, for the success of such a scheme would depend on its administration. He urged a postponement of the proposal till the House met in October. ' ! i

The Hon. J. A. Hanau supported the clause. The American Federation of Labour had supported the principle. If the clause was in favour of private interests he would oppose it, but the proposal was to ensure adequate national service by persons unable to undertake active service overseas. PRIVATE INTERESTS. Mr. M'Combs promptly drew attention to part of the clause referring to employment under the Crown or any. other employer. He contended therefore that Mr. Hanan had not read this part of the clause. * Mr. Payne:, He was clean\ bowled, middle wicket. Mr. M'Combs held that the clause provided for the forcing of persons to I work for private employers. The safeguards as to the Arbitration Act and awards were not adequate, for not all industries came within these provisions. There '. were also industries—waterside labour, for example—in which the wages were above arbitration laward rates. It • was the 1 most ■ pernicious clause that had been put "into any Bill. He i denounced it as an attempt to establish "slavery." The clause had been circulated only two hours. It had not been published in the daily press. The people who would be affected had not received an opportunity to look into the scheme., It was an attempt to do something behind the people's backs. •

NOT ONLY WORKERS AFFECTED. Sir Joseph. Ward said it was impossible to say what might be required to be done in this country in six or 'three months. They were, getting close up to the need for. some orga.nisa.tion that would help the cost of living. Mr. M'Combs had discussed the clause as if'it referred only to workers. It referred to businesses, premises, etc. They had no power to close down an unessential industry at present. His attention had been drawn to the case recently where two ships were detained because no one had the authority to withdraw men from unessential occupations. No Government would attempt to "put" the clause into operation without the active support of the workers. Suppose.they were not to have the same amount of shipping as in the past twelve months (which was certain to-be the case for some months) it would bs necessary to have' an organisation to use tho services of the men who were thrown out of employment in consequence. It might be necessary to use the legislation to keep the 'railways going or to keep towns lighted. Mr. R. Fletcher (Wellington Central) : What about the efficiency of the nonessentials. '

Sir Joseph Ward : Well, everyone has to live. If it became necessary they would have to distinguish between essential and non-essential services.

In reply to a question, Sir Joseph Ward stated that, he could not' say who would administer the legislation.

THE STATE'S RIGHT.

The Prime Minister said he saw nothing to cause the alarm expressed by the member for Lyttelton: They must admit that in a time of crisis the Slate was entitled to the service -of all its people, and, having admitted'that, there was nothing to object to. If things became no worse than they were at present there would be- no need to use the clause, but they must prepare for a different state of affairs. They had lost seriously by lack of proper organisation, and they could gain considerably by organisation.

Mr. Payne: Who is your organiser? : The Prime Minister: That is an important point. This legislation will have to be handled very carefully. It will not be administered by an incompetent man or men. . . ..-.■;-

It might _be necessary, he added, to reduce unessential industries or close them down altogether. Quite a number could be closed down with advantage to the' public arid the people themselves. If they were to maintain and increase their reinforcements, as he believed would bo necessary, they would have to use the services of every man. 1 He could give this assurance, that nothing in this legislation was intended for purposes of private gain. Mr. Forbes: Well, strikeout "private employer."

The Prime Minister: No, we can't, because we may need to take men from a private employer. ■'.' .

WHO WOULD ADMINISTER?

The Prime Minister said it was intended, prior to the regulations under the clause being made, to call a conference, •t which there would be representatives

of the unions and some representatives of industry. He could not say who would have charge of the legislation. He had intended, if he did not go Home, to take charge of the work himself, but the framing of regulations and other preliminaries would take a considerable time, and it was improbable that much would be done before Parliament met again. PROTECTION OF WAGE-EARNERS.

" I can give this assurance," concluded Mr. Massey, "that no hurt is intended to wage-earners under this clause. If we cannot make their conditions better (and they are good at present, when labour is in demand), we certainly shall not make them worse."

Mr. W. A. Veitch (Wangamii) said there was no doubt Labour should be properly organised, but the Government proposals must be administered with the utmost caution. To obtain a reasonable set of working conditions the Government should, wherever possible, be guided by the Arbitration Court. Mr. Payne thought the clause should be dropped in the meantime and a sound scheme be brought down next session after enquiries had been made in Labour circles.:

. Mr. Massey said that if the clause were dropped time would be lost. Without the regulations the clause would be of no use. However, in the drafting Labour representatives would be consulted. He read a report of the National Efficiency Board, in which it was expressly stated that the scheme should not be used for private gain. STATE CONTROL. As to the control of the industry, said the Prime Minister, one could not lay down a hard and fast rule, but it was his opinion that any industry affected, by this clause should be controlled byf the State. He did not say that this was possible in every case. He would be prepared to renew his guarantee that no hardship should result from the clause till members had had the further opportunity of considering it. Mr. Witty (Riccarton) asked if the Prime Minister would compel unoccupied persons to go to work. There were many men in Wellington and Christohurch who '-were practical farmers, and so on. They should be made to go to work as well as Labour. The Prime Minister said they had this'power nowY If it were not duplication he would be prepared to re-enact it. In reply to Mr. Forbes, he said that there was reasonable power to pay compensation to persons whose business was taken over.

The Hon. G. W. Russell said that the proposal, in regard to industries, was the corollary of conscription for military purposes. Another national register would be necessary to determine the numbers of idle men. available for essential work. There was no intention of aiming at organised Labour, but at men who were now outside the pale of useful labour.

Mr, Walker said that one hesitated to oppose the proposal, especially after the assurances of Ministers. The principle had been already approved. Personally he was inclined to let the clause stand, provided that the conference promised by the Prime Minister would be arranged. He thought, however, that the machinery of the Arbitration Act would bp too slow for fixing the wages under the scheme.

Mr. M'Combs said the Hon. G.. W. Russell had given the show away—it was proposed to conscript schoolboys and men to get in the harvest for a private, employer. It was a monstrous proposition to control only the workers in the way proposed. ' The Government had now the power to compel persons to undertake/ some useful occupation. Let it take power to close down unessential industries,. and it would have all this power necessary. At any rate until it could undertake an all-round national organisation scheme.

Mr. M'Combs asked if the Prime Minister would insert as a proviso to the clause the stipulation in the Efficiency Board's recommendation that nothing in the clause should empower the transfer of labour for purposes of private gain. '

Mr. Massey said he would have it put in the regulations. He was advised by the law officer that if it were put in the Bill there would be serious risk^of spoiling the whole purpose of the clause. Mr. 1 McCombs persisted that this would not have the effect of reassuring Labour.

The Hon. A. T. Ngata (Eastern Maori) wished to know if there were any provision for ■ the delegation of authority under the clause to local bodies.

Mr. Massey said there was not. Mr.' Ngata ' Baid ■ that a scheme controlled from Wellington would not suit his district. . A committee of men of the district could do what was necessary. He would vote for the clause, but he was not enthusiastic over such a half-developed scheme. It should have been brought down three years ago.;

AN AMENDMENT PROPOSED.

Mr. M'Combs moved as an amendment to.the clause :—

"Provided always that any regulation made under this section shall contain the proviso that no labour shall be transferred from any trade, industry, or occupation for private gain."

Sir Joseph Ward said the clause could not stand in the Bill because the necessary exceptions could not be made to deal with emergencies.

A small stonewall appeared to be in course of erection, Messrs. M'Combs, Hindmarsh, and Payne being the masons. The Prime Minister said that an important Bill could not be held up. Would the members who were preventing progress take the responsibility of a clause, which had been asked for all over the country, being dropped? Mr, Payne : Yes.

1, MORE ASSTJBANCES. The Prime Minister gave an assurance that the clause could be reconsidered next session, but this did not satisfy the Labour trioV The Prime Minister then made a. final offer : II & would add % vT^ viso to'the clause that it should "not come into operation till the House had had the opportunity of considering the regulations. Labour accepted this, but there was an immediate protest. The Hon. J. (A. Hanan contended that the working men would blame Parliament if there were not action under the clause within twelve months.

Mr. G. J. Anderson (Mataura) and Mr. D. Buick- (Palmerston) protested against the House allowing itself to be dictated to by a small coterie. Finally, Sir Joseph Ward announced that the clause would be held over in the meantime and brought down by Governor's Message on Monday morning as a new Bill, when it could be freely considered. The rest of the Bill could be put through.