The Grey River Argus FRIDAY, March 21, 1947. JOB’S COMFORTERS

Grey River Argus, 21 March 1947, Page 4

The Grey River Argus FRIDAY, March 21, 1947. JOB’S COMFORTERS

JT is evidently a disappointment to the Jeremiahs now so vocal in the Dominion that the public is no more disposed than the Government to be humbugged by defeatist chatter. The calls for Parliamentary or other talks upon such matters as industrial disputes, electricity, gambling, and leisure'are not calculated to case the situation so much as provoke Blither agitation. A Wellington City Councillor is given wide publicity for a proposal to set up some sort of board to inquire into such things as labour shortages, idleness, folly in industrial disputes, taxation, misuse of leisure, education, gambling, etc., etc. It seems as if those who would like Parliamentary debating are anxious, in default of it till June, for floodgates of talk to be opened immediately. What good mere talk is going to do nobody is able to say. The only claim by the Opposition leader and the press is that if Parliament now met, there would be more publicity about the hydro question. In the case of the .industrial situation, the object of the proposal for a board or a commission is evidently to .put the workers in the dock. It is noteworthy that the proposer has nothing to say for workers except that more of them arc needed, and that they should be examined as to whether they work hard enough during the 40 hour week Why not make the order of reference cover the question of whether there should be more opportunity for wage earners to assume increased industrial responsibility. and so lend their ability in improving output? Why not also include the question of admitting wage earners to ownership? The absence of any such suggestion demonstrates that the standpoint of those who want inquests upon industry is entirely that of the employer. The need of the day is not talk, but action. But it is a sinister suggestion that tiie industrial question, as affecting the workers, should be identified with, the questions of gambling, pride, folly, idleness, and the like. The workers are no more prone to these faults than are other members of the community. It is said that the country may be facing an emergency, and that therefore the fundamental issue is one of individual responsibility. Surely then soiqc ad hoc board or other is not a proper tribunal to sit in judgment upon the individual, or rather such individuals as work for wages? There is always a case for the promotion of a good un derstanding in industry, but it is not going to be done merely by Parliamentary talk or the collection of opinions. Rather must the workers obtain tangible inducements for any increased contribution to production, a thing that is not to be confused with the mumbo-jumbo of a fear complex or the confusion of interests which are distinct. The strategy in many quarters to-day is that of putting the workers in the pillory and of exaggerating any difficulty to the detriment of the Government.