Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4th., 1934. UNIONS AND POLITICS.

Greymouth Evening Star, 4 September 1934, Page 4

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4th., 1934. UNIONS AND POLITICS.

'J’RADE union is not strength, these days, judging from the statistics and the unhappy experiences of many of these industrial organisations throughout the world. The decline in numbers and prestige is to be regretted, for it is good for national welfare that the workers should be well organised and capably led. Unhappily, so soon as the organisation reaches high levels, the leadership often falls away. In some lands, the unions have been drastically suppressed, or shorn of any powers of aggression, and this has not im-

proved the lot of the workers, causing discontent, tempting them to support the more extreme forms of polities, which promise them greater justice. Such promise is not necessarily fulfilled, as Russian experiences prove. The dominance of polities in the | industrial movement is one of the

I causes of trade union decline.

There is no reason whj* a man should not be, say, a staunch Conservative and also a loyal trade unionist —indeed thousands are both in Britain —but Labour, Socialist, and Communist supporters have captured the reins, and workers find that they must sacrifice their political principles, or their union membership. The consequence is seen in the small number of unionists compared with the total number of workers. The Trade Union Congress in Britain is holding the annual conference, this week, and a preliminary secretarial announcement admitted a further decrease for the year of 100,000 members, the total being only three and one-third millions. Workers in Britain who are not union-mem-bers are thus seen to be in an enormous majority, yet the T.U.C. claims to speak for the workers. The alliance of the Labour political movement and trade unions has not been justified by the results forthcoming when Labour and Socialists have been in power. Australia and Britain supply evidence that the workers pay dearly for Labour rule. Conditions are far from perfect under any other Party Government, but in British lands —the only instances we need trouble about, —the workers are better off under non-Labour Governments. Some excuse might be found in the fact that Labour Governments were new to the job, and thus, errors were unavoidable. The pity is that they refuse to learn from experience, but insist upon 1 further adventures of the kind that have already proved disastrous. For instance, the British Labourites claim that “public ownership and control of the primary industries and services is an essential foundation step for economic reorganisation. Banking and credit, transport, electricity, water, iron, and steel, coal, gas, agriculture, textiles, shipping, shipbuilding, engineering, are ripe for drastic reorganisation, and for the most part nothing short of immediate public ownership and control will be effective.” Banking is to be a State monopoly, as is transport, landownership, and various other things, a programme that needs only to be outlined to show its futility. “Public control,” would be anything but public. Is it any wonder that workers decline to rush to join trade-unions when these support a policy bringing all industries under State dictatorship, which, in practice, would take from the workers every liberty they now enjoy.