QUESTIONS FOR MR. FRASER

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 88, 13 April 1923, Page 2

QUESTIONS FOR MR. FRASER

TO IBE EDITOIt. Sir,—l am obliged to Mr. Fraser for answering. the.questions I submitted rehis party's proposal^ to give a)l Corporation employeos special representation on the committees of the City Council in addition to•■ their ■'rights as. electors of the city. Whilst Mr. BVaser conveniently sidoateps the fact that this involves plural voting rights /or a special section in the" community, his answer makos plain that he definitely endorses the policy of practically giving- each Corporation employee two votes; all other worker* and citizens have only oner Mr. Fraßer'is wrong in thinking that I did not know tho council could legally appoint members of a committee of the council from outside the council. Section 49 -of-the Municipal Corporations Act, 1920, has been the law for a considerable time. This provision \yas made to allow any counoil under special circumstances to add to a committee from outside any person having particular special knowledge of a matter being dealt with. That'it was never intended to be applied in a general way to the increasing of the membership of the committees by adding non-elective persons, is, I submit, demonstrated by the fact that such i appointments have scarcely ever been made. I do not remember a single oeca- , sion in Wellington. ' What Mr. Fraser now tells the electors | of ..Wellington, and-special note should be ' made of it, is that'if a Labour Party Council is returned it will proceed to make general appointments to the committees of the council by addin.tr to these committee* representatives elected by the Corporation employees' unions. That is certainly a, definite announcement for class nonbol of thr city services. From time | to '.imp omn'.oyers of Wellington have hr-.-m on the City Council. If any councillor, who ch:incDrl In ha on omnWai. U.A

proposed the appointment of representatives of the Employers' Association on any committee o£ the City Council, would there not have been an outcry from the Labour Party about class domination ? No employer ]ias ever made ouch a proposal. The principle which the Labour Party would strongly condemn if acted upon by others, Mr. Fraser and his party say is quite right when they apply it to serve their own interests. I would hero point out that whilst-soGtion 49 empowers the council to appoint a committeeman from ontside,: what Mr. Fraser advocates is that unions, apart from the council, should elect such persons. He says: "By ejecting its own delegates on to the Management Committee, the. Tramwaymen's Union would have the responsibility ioJ sharing in the running of the concern." The fact is that tram way nien have their share in control as electors just as all electors have, but what the Labour Party- 'proposes' is that-all city employees shall have a double sharo. If that policy moans anything it in Labour Syndicalism. Hie root idea from which it springs is the doctrine, of the I.W.W. sohool of industrial unionism—"the trams for the tramwaymen; the ships for the seamen; the railways for the railwaymen," aud so on. I find the same class control idea' enunciated by the Alliance of Labour in those words, "control of all industries by the workers, who operate them." The Mayor says the principle is. on the line of Spvietwro. It certainly lends the power, towards class- dictation, and Mr. D. Sullivan, M.P., baa recently written that "the easense of Sovietism is class dictation." If the Corporaton employees retain their rights as electors and in addition have special direct representation on the Management Committees of the council, I urge consideration of whether they would not thus bocome the masters and controllers of tho city. This is the revolutionary proposal Mr. Fraser upholds. It is not true that the Whitley scheme or the Sankey Commission ever proposed anything so preposterous as what Mr. Fraaer'-is seeking to excuse. These industriali-t! never suggested that where workmen alveacly have representation, the citj employees have it as". clectore, they should be given a double share. Mr Fraser really casts ridicule on his own party s claim when he presents the picturo of a Labour Party Council forced with the problem of a general reduction of wages taking place and the tramwaymen at the same time, demanding an increase. He says such a council woulc solve the problem by inviting those who asked _ for the rise to come on to the comjnittex: which will handle tho matter. How very simple that seen*. Mr. Fraser does not mention the workers who help to pay the rise: they surely ought to go on to the committee ahn. but seemingly a Labour Party Council would not. in'vitf ■ them. Mr. Fraser's -an-wer to my lettei makes his caea. worse. His statement reads to me like class consciousness run mad —' I am, etc., :u , L. B. WILSON. ' 11th April.