NO AWARD SAFE

Grey River Argus, 17 March 1932, Page 5

NO AWARD SAFE

UNDER NEW BILL Government’s Admission (From our Parliamentary Reporter i WELLINGTON, Alarch JU The long and dreary fight agaiusi tho passage of the Arbitration A.'d Amendment Bill, which has already occupied about eight sitting days in the House, was continued to-day when the discussion in iCo-minittee was -«• sumed. Mr. J. O'Brien opened tho. aftnr noon's discussion. Air O’Brien said that this Bill laid the door wide op(‘» to the resort to sweating conditions, much of which conditions already oxsted to-day Mr Contes: Where? Air Howard: In Christchurch! Afr O'Brien; Yes! There’s ulenr.v of evidence (hat it is going on. Air 11. T. Armstronr asked what was going So be done with the Arbi tration Court after this Bill had hoon | passed. Would the Judge and the As . lessors be paid for nothing or w«uul they Be placed in a glass case? Bev C. Carr. They will Ija embalm ed! Mr Armstrong: Well I, Tor one, oh ject to keen on paying an expensive Court of this aa.turo if it. has no worn to do The I,about speakers nad difficulty in getting specific replies to the> questions on the Bill.

AWARDS IN JEOPARDS Mr Holland called for a reply to the following question: What would the Government do if tho employers assessors in conciliation refused tv |take an industrial dispute to the Ar bitration Court? The Minister. Mr Hamilton, replied that if that happened, the awa«*j sirn ply lapsed! Mr Holland further asked: What will the Government- do? Air Hamilton: There will simply bo no award in that industry. Afr Holland: And the employees will be at tho mercy of the employ I Mr Hamilton: It will apply to both parties. That 5s the penalty if either I side refused to take a dispute to tho Court But you are assuming that one side goes to conciliation without a full sense of its responsibilities. • Afr Loe: They have done so in th" I past! j Mr O'Brien: That is what the em ■ plovers want! Air Haimilton: That is not what the employers want. T know the o- :• ployers as well as the members of the Labour Party, and I say the employers of New Zoul.Tnft To-day are just as anxious as the workcis to preserve the awards. Afr Hamilton continued that be had been accused of not understanding the Bill- He did not claim to no the last word on tho subject, but he understood the position as well as any one. Mr Semple: We understand the purpose of the 'BillMr Hamilton: Yes. The purpose lb voluntary arbitration. Mr Semple: To bring down wager. ! Mr Hamilton: That is a different matter. Continuing, the Minister said that be recognised that, his Bill made farren bh>.r nit •rations to the arbitration svstGui, bat if it had destroyed the principle of collective bargaining, it might hav'* justified the allegation that tho -■'"Court was being destroyed also. Manx- agreements were to-day being made in conciliation without ro course to the Court. AGREEMENTS ALSO MENACED. Air Mclveeifi~But if these are made, the Government can sweep them away by Order in-Council under Clause Tw 1 The Minister: Well Clause Two, is, perhaps, not measurable, but these arc difficult times, and we have to do j things that are not too popular.

an offer. I Mr Holland said that if the Minister would eliminate Clause Two, providing for the issue of Orders inCouncil exempting industries, Clause Seven, which insists upon unanimity in eonoilation before a dispute is referred to the Court, and Clause Fourteen which makes special provision for niusterers in the South, the Laboui Party would then allow the remainder Jof the Bill go througn. AN UNEXPECTED AMENDMENT. (Special to “Argus.”) WELLINGTON, Alarch 16. A machinery amendment giving power for the appointment of additional Conciliation Commissioners was introduced by Governor’s message. The Labour Members asked what was in the mind of the Government in bringing in such an amendment. The question was discussed till midnight, whoa the House adjourned. SECOND READING DIVISION. (Per Press Association) WELLINGTON, March 16. Following was the division list for the second reading for the Arbitration Act Amendment Bill: (41) —Ansell. Bitchcner. Broadfoot, Burnett, Clinkard, Coates. Cobbe. Dp La Perreile, Dickie. Endean, Field, Forbes, Hamilton, Hargest, Harris, Hawke, Healy, U I Holland, Jull, Kyle, Linklater, Lyc. I McDougall, McLeod, Ale-Skimming. MacMillan, MacPherson, Alakit.auara. ,T. N. Massey, Murdoch, J. A. Nash. INgata. Polson, Ransom, Reid, Smith, a. Stuart, Sykes, Veitch. Williams, Young. I Against the Bill: (29).— Armstrong, I Atmore, Barnard, Carr, Chapman. Connolly, Fraser, 11. E. Holland, Howard, Jones, Jordan, Langstone, Lee. McCombs, AfcKeen, W. W. Massev. Munro, W- Nash, O’Brien. Parry, Richards, Rushworth, Samuel. Schramm. [Semple, Stallworthy. Sullivan. WH[l'inson, Wright. Pairs for the Bill: Henarc Te Tomo,

Bodkin, Stewart. Against the Bill Savage,, Black, Coleman, Mason