TRADES UNION BILL

Gisborne Times, Volume LXV, Issue 10376, 6 April 1927, Page 5

TRADES UNION BILL

diA> W AT STRIKE-MAKERS

CAUSES UPROAR AMONG LABOKITES.

ALLEGED ATTACK ON WORKING

CLASSES.

(United Press Assn.—Copyright.) (Received April 5, 7 p.m.) T ■ LONDON, April 4. _ the House of Commons the Trade Disputes and Trade Unions Bill was read a first timer' The Bill, stipulates that any. strike, having any object besides the furtherance of a trade dispute within the industry, in which the strikers are engaged, is illegal, if it is designed, or calculated to coerce the Government or to intimidate a substantial portion of the community.

Hie Bill lays down a penalty of two years’ imprisonment for the "instigators and the participators. It forbids intimidatory picketing and prohibits the picketing of non strikers residences, under a penalty of £2O and three months’ imprisonment. Henceforth, it is illegal to require a trado unionist to contribute to a political fund, unless he specifically agrees to do so in writing, and the political funds of .a trade union must be kept separate from the ordinary funds.

Civil servants are forbidden to belong to trade unions which cater for 11011-civil servants, or those who are affiliated to organisations, the federation of whose membership is not confined to persons employed under the Crown, or having political objects. Finally, local and other public authorities are forbidden to make employment conditional upon membership of a trade union, or in any way favor trade union employees. The Bill lays down a penalty of £lO or three months’ imprisonment for a breach of contract of service, with a local or a public authority. The Act does not applv to Northern Ireland.—A.N.Z.C'.A/

(Received April 5, 9 p.m.) LONDON, April 5. “Before the Labor members saw the Trade Union Bill they decided to fight it line by line. Since seeing its text, their determination has been intensified. The Bill has proved far more comprehensive than anticipated, even by the Conservative press. There is hut one opinion among the Labor members of the House of Commons,’' says the Daily Telegraph. “This opens a battle royal.” The second reading is not expected before Easter, but Labor members are already preparing a joint national campaign by the political and industrial sections of the party. Conservative opinion cordially approves of the Bill, while the Liberal papers, the Daily News and the Daily Chronicle do not comment.

The Daily Herald’s political correspondent regards the clause headed “Prevention of Intimidation,” as probably the most contentious, expressing the opinion that this imposes such restrictions on picketing as would leave the Courts at liberty to declare almost any sorb illegal. In this connection, it may be stated that the Bill defines “intimidation” as meaning “to cause in a person’s mind a reasonable apprehension to him or any member of ins family or damage to his property.” “Injury” includes physical injury, boycott, loss of any Kind or exposure to hatred, ridicule or contempt. Editorially the Daily Herald says this amazing measure has been introduced without a mandate. The Government dare not submit it to a general election. It is not even the fruit of consideration by a Royal Commission. It is purely an irresponsible measure fomented by a Tory organisation, supplemented by kindred organisations and by the employers and plotted in Cabinet, while _ Mr Baldwin was making hypocritical speeches about “goodwill and peace in industry.” The- Government has made its own doom doubly sure. The Bill will lead to such a revival ot working class activity that Mr Baldwin and his associates will hav e cause to regret their stupidity. Mr Arthur Henderson says the Bill is a direct attack upon trades unions; it is a challenge to the workers. —A. and N.Z.C.A.