The Evening Star FRIDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1938. DISILLUSIONMENT.

Evening Star, Issue 23130, 2 December 1938, Page 8

The Evening Star FRIDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1938. DISILLUSIONMENT.

The Labour Government was sent back to power by the aid of a substanial majority of the voters of New Zealand, but it cannot command the complete allegiance or the unquestioning loyalty of all the workers. Not even the governihg body of trade unionism itself, the Federation of Labour, is able to control the rank and file of its following, This is shown by the strikes that have recently occurred. Such a state of affairs is not singular to New Zealand, but it appears to have surprised members of the Government as well as trade union leaders. Mr J. Roberts, one of the most widely known of the Federation of Labour officials, has been upbraiding his comrades for their disloyalty to pledges. The unions that had resorted to strikes had, he said, done so without consulting the federation. They had been disloyal to their own industrial organisation, and they had broken the laws of the country. Unions registered under the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act forfeited their right to strike. They were not compelled to register under the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration

Act, but once they had done so they ought not to treat their engagement as a scrap of paper.

The Minister of Industries and Commerce (Hon. D. G. Sullivan) also voiced his disappointment at the strikers’ actions. He said that the sporadic and unnecessary outbreaks that were taking place could be controlled only by the workers being thoroughly organised and disciplined. “It is essential in a country like ours, where the Government is fighting for the workers and fighting Capitalism for the good of the workers and Democracy, that there should be continuity of work and action behind the Government.”

All of which is extremely significant. Did the Labour Government expect to receive an unquestioning loyalty from the workers whom they represent? If they did, then they were counting upon something that no other democratic Government has enjoyed. When Mr Sullivan spoke of the workers being “ thoroughly and properly organised and disciplined,” he cannot, of course, have meant a discipline imposed from outside, as is the case in dictatorial countries. He meant a discipline willingly accepted by men and women out of a sense of loyalty and gratitude—a moral discipline. But many of the unions do not 'acknowledge such demands for their allegiance. Perhaps they are disappointed and disillusioned because the Government’s legislation has not brought them greater material benefits. What they have gained in wages and hours of work has been lost in higher prices. Probably, however, they would have been restless and dissatisfied even had they gained all and more than they expected, for that seems to be the way of human nature. Even Mr Sullivan’s frank declaration (which many will have taken notice of) that the Government is “fighting for the workers and fighting Capitalism for the good of the workers and Democracy ” is not likely to cure agitation. The fact is, the workers are everywhere in a state of unrest. How could they be otherwise, in a world so distraught? Apparently it i$ only in Germany and Italy, where they are held in check by force, that they are—or appear to be—loyal to the powers set over them. In New Zealand things are different, and the Labour Government has had its eyes a little opened. ‘Here, as elsewhere, the workers are groping for something different, and a good many of them seem willing to risk the substance they enjoy for the sake of a better that lives in their imagination. They are lucky to have such freedom. But they should be careful not to overstep the bounds of reason.