Greymouth Evening Star. MONDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1948. Filching The People’s Rights

Greymouth Evening Star, 11 October 1948, Page 4

Greymouth Evening Star. MONDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1948. Filching The People’s Rights

JJENCEFORTH representatives of workerk on the waterfront are to sit on harbour boards. They are not to be elected by the people but are to be appointed by the Government. That is the principal purpose of the bill which was strongly contested by.the Opposition in the'House of Representatives last week. At first glance, it would seem that the Government’s aim has been merely to grant the workers a voice in waterfront management. That is a wrong view of the issue. The Government’s action is a serious violation of a democratic principle. The’ right of the people to choose by vote the men or women to control their affairs —in this case, the harbour boards — has been further whittled down. If the Government’s action is right, then it would be equally justified in appointing public servants to sit in the House of Representatives. • There is no difference in principle. Government speakers in the debate in Parliament on the bill advanced the argument that already payers of.dues had special representatives on harboui* Hoards. But two wrongs do not make a right. This was recognised in the report of a Select Committee of the House of Representatives presented in 1945. The membership of that committee had a majority of Government members, who strongly expressed themselves in favour, of. the “principle of democratic elections” for harbour boards. The committee’s finding, which was unanimous, was:

The principle of allowing special interests to be represented on a harbour board is not one that we are prepared to endorse. Shipowners and payers of dues merely pass their charges on to the general public and to allow them to dictate policy is quite undemocratic. If such interests are represented then farmers whose produce is shipped and wharf labourers who work on the wharf are entitled as such to be represented. The principle is entirely wrong. . . . The principle of democratic elections should be instituted for all seats on harbour boards and representation of shipowners and payers of dues cancelled. In view of this forthright statement, it was nothing short of amazing to find that all the Government members of the committee, including one who is now a Minister of the Crown, voted against'the “principle of democratic elections” in the House of Representatives last week. The Government whip had cracked and they had fallen into line. The most reasonable explanation of this occurrence seems to be that advanced by the Leader of the Opposition, when he said that “watersiders had told the Government that they had to have representation and that they were going Io get it.” There was, of course, much talk in the debate of the desirability of giving the workers a voice in management, but the harbour boards are not the employers of the watersiders.

What is really remarkable about the Government’s action, however, is not its decision so to act—it has committed other violations of democratic principles—is the apathy with which the people have received it. Apart from protests from the. major harbour boards and the Opposition in Parliament, little has been said. The local harbour board, when the question was raised at one of its meetings a little time ago, was content, apparently, to leave the matter to the Government. Board members, it would seem, have forgotten that, as the representatives of the people, they should also be the defenders of the rights of the people. Now that the Government has made a start with harbour boards, it is likely that it will extend sectional representation, by appointment, to other local bodies. It is a movement which should be opposed with all the force the people can command. There is nothing to prevent any reputable person, be he employer or employee, from offering himself for election to any local body—for the people to make their choice. That is democracy in practice, and any violation of this principle should be vigorously resisted. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.