The Evening Star. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1931. LABOUR’S PROTEST.

Evening Star, Issue 20720, 17 February 1931, Page 8

The Evening Star. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1931. LABOUR’S PROTEST.

The New Zealand Parliament has been summoned for the transaction of business on March 11. The New Zealand Alliance of Labour is convening a conference of all industrial unions at Wellington on March 10. From the statement of the Alliance secretary the purpose of the conference is self-preserva-tion against Government proposals “ in the interests of . the money-lenders, bankers, and bondholders.” There may be that element, but it would be foolish to regard the convening of the conference as anything else than an attempt at intimidation. It is a challenge to the community as to whether Parliament or the Alliance of Labour shall rule. The Alliance, it appears, has passed a resolution calling on the workers to offer all opposition possible to “ wage reductions made without consulting Parliament or the organised workers.” Parliament is to be consulted. But why should organised workers be consulted? How could it be done? It is neither desirable nor possible. One reason for stating this is that there is a vast difference between consulting organised Labour and consulting Labour organisations. It is these latter which demand consultation on even terms with Parliament. Do they fairly represent the worker? It is notorious that the typical member has long since lost control of his own union. It has passed into the hands of those who have made Labour the sport of politics of their own particular brand, and who are at this moment demanding that politics shall become the sport of Labour —again of their own particular brand. We have already seen what has happened in Australia, where politics have \mfortunately long been the sport of Labour. It may be taken as read that all the advice that would be tendered by the Wellington Convention (if sought) would be the continuation of the methods which contributed towards the situation that Mr Forbes proposes to take in hand now lest it become unmanageable. It is not often that Labour spokesmen will admit that the standard of living of their class has been raised in New Zealand. It was done largely through the medium of the Arbitration Court, but without much regard to whether that raising was being effected on a stable basis. Because there were some offsets to higher wages in the form of resultant higher cost of living there were complaints of the Arbitration Court for its inability to make the net gains coincide with the gross gains. In some cases there were breaks away from the Arbitration Court as too slow by comparison with direct action. It has been proved by the fall in commodity prices that the elevation effected by the court was not on a stable basis. Mr Forbes proposes to remedy this by authorising the court (through parliamentary sanction) to review awards, and unquestionably the revision must be downwards. Just as plainly this is what the Alliance of Labour is resolved to oppose tooth and nail. When world prices were rising the arbitration system was a comfortable enough craft; now that prices are falling the Labour demagogues fail to see why it should not be just as comfortable and safe. But the current is now running the opposite way, and unless power is supplied to counteract drift the craft will speedily be among the dangerous rapids below. There are among the trades union officials some at least who feel wage reduction to bo inevitable; and, as an offset to the Arbitration Court engaged on the process, they demand a tribunal to enforce a corresponding reduction in the cost of living. The secretary of the Employers’ Federation approves of the principle of price reduction, if not also of the method proposed

above to enforce it. Perhaps it is a question of both or neither; in which case, seeing that it has been decided to retain the arbitration system, the pricefixing tribunal will bo needed. But it is a cumbersome and not always a competent or equitable process, and will add to the cost of government and extend its sphere yet further into trade realms. Both developments are undesirable ; it is imperative, indeed, that at present tho cost of government must be reduced, not increased. If New Zealand is to be constitutionally governed it must admit no rival to the constitutional authority, which is Parliament. Nor must it tolerate Parliament being overawed or browbeaten by outside organisations, particularly any not truly representative of what they claim to represent. Labour has its representation in Parliament, and it has practically threatened bitterly to oppose there all tho Government’s proposals except those in connection with tho earthquake disaster. And tho Labour leaders know that such opposition, so far as Parliament is concerned, will bo a mere kicking against the pricks. Mr- Holland sees that there is now an end to any dependence the United Party may have had on the Labour Party for retention of power. He declares that Mr Forbes has capitulated to the Reform Party. In short, there should now bo no obstacle to a fusion between those two parties who wish to prevent New Zealand following in the path which Australia trod under Labour direction. It is a cause for thankfulness that the great majority of our parliamentarians do not ignore that lesson—viz., how real is the danger to which nations may bo exposed by the mishandling of their public finances by groups of men collectively dominant but individually ignorant. Mr Holland’s counterplan to Mr Forbes’s hard common sense is contained in the closing paragraph of his yesterday’s manifesto: —

During the ■war no difficulty was experienced in organising the credit of the dominion. Special methods were adopted to compel the people to contribute to war loans, and an amount of £55,000,000 loan money was raised within the dominion. There is no reason why similar action should not bo resorted to today. The whole of the dominion s credit should now he mobilised to infuse life into industry. This is the time for an extension of national industrial activity rather than a down grade policy. Yet what Mr Holland proposes is an extension of the down grade policy which began during the war and has led to partial paralysis of national industrial activity. Mr Holland would administer a crushing blow to New Zealand’s credit, which Mr Forbes is seeking to uphold. Credit is a flower of slow growth and sensitive nature, but under modern conditions it is essential to the welfare of nations as of individuals, and that is why statesmanship is concerned to preserve it at all costs. It is the nature of credit that if its roots be attacked it fades away, and a moment’s consideration shows that it must he so; yet every country has its crude and confident exponents of new and unsound financial doctrines. So long as they are in a small minority they do little harm, but with every addition to their ranks their prejudicial effect on credit increases. Unquestionably the events of the last few years have shown how serious the position may become in any country when men without knowledge gain . contx-61 of a nation’s financial machinery and begin to tamper with the springs of credit. The temptation to create credit—mobilise is a misnomer—is almost irresistible to those who are not absolutely convinced that tokens and symbols of wealth are not wealth, and that to print additional cloakroom tickets does not add to the number of hats deposited in it.