INDUSTRIAL LAW

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXII, Issue 257, 13 October 1932, Page 8

INDUSTRIAL LAW

REINSTATEMENT SOUGHT

LABOUR INTRODUCES BILL.

PRIME MINISTER’S REJOINDER.

(By Telegraph—Special to “Tribune.”)

Wellington, Oct. 12. Labour’s efforts to secure the restoration of the amended and repealed sections of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act by means of a special bill drew a spirited rejoinder from the Prime Minister in the House to-day, when he declared that the Government had been fullv justified m altering the law and that the country could not have continued under the old conditions.

Mr Forbes said that mention had been made of the Hon. W. Pember Reeves, father of the original legislation. “I say without hesitation,” he said, “that had he been in New Zealand when we passed the amendment and seen the position I was in in regard to carrying on the government of the country, he would have done exactly as I did.” Labour voices: Never.

Mr Forbes said that Mr Pember Reeves was not a rank Conservative like the Labour members, who declared that because a law was passed 40 years ago it should not -e tampered with or brought up-to-date. The charge brought by Mr J. McCombs (Lyttelton) was that the Government had amended legislation which was 40 years old, but great changes had taken place since the measure was first passed. He remembered the passing of the original Act and he had then been fully in accord with its provisions. To-day, however, greater consideration was shown to employees by employers than bver before.

In the old days workers in factories were certainly treated badly, but the conditions existing then could not be compared in any way with those of to-day.

Mr McCombs: But we are rapidly getting back to them. • The Prime Minister said that Mr McCombs had stated that retailers had state! before the inter-party committee that thejr business had fallen off as a result of wage-cutting, but none of them had said they would be able to maintain the wages they were then paying.

Mr McCombs: Yes, they did. Mr Forbes said it was known that wage reductions had been made inevitable through the falling off in national income. No difficulties whatever would have been experienced had the Government been able to borrow money which would have gone into the retailers’ shops, but everyone had to share less and the retailers, like everyone else, had felt the effect. It was ridiculous to suggest that reductions in wages and removal of restrictions upon employment ,had been responsible for bringing about an increase in the number of workless. It was well known that the employers complained bitterly that they were unable to do many things for fear of prosecution, and the number of cases brought against he employers showed that while there as the appearance of industrial peace the feeling throughout industry was that restrictions and prosecutions were not creating harmonious feeling. Mr McCombs: Is there harmony at the present time?

“How can there be harmony when reductions are being brought about?” the Prime Minister asked. “The honour-able gentleman knows that there was harmonious feeling between the Government and public service ui 'll we had to reduce salaries.”

No one with any common sense would deny that. No matter how unpleasant it had been to do many things, they had been most necessary. If the employers said to-morrow that they would increase wages there would be agreements in all cases in dispute, but it was very much more difficult to secure harmony when reductions were being made.

“I do not want to see low wages in this country, because if the employers are able to give high wages it shows that the country is prosperous,” said Mr Forbes, Low wages, however, had been brought about by the state of the country and they could not be avoided. THE BILL “TALKED OUT.’’ < ——■— -. Wellington, Oct. 12. Introducing the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill in the House of Representatives to-day, Mr J. McCombs (Lyttelton) said that the measure proposed to repeal the legislation passed last session taking away from the workers the right to appeal to an impartial tribunal in connection with industrial disputes. It had been pointed out when last session’s legislation was before the House that previous wage-reducing measures had proved disastrous to trade and industry. Representatives of wholesalers, retailers and manufacturers had testified before an interparty committee in support of that contention, but the Government had amended the Arbitration Act to give the Employers’ Association an opportunity to force wages down still further. Although the amending Act had been in operation only a few months, industrial chaos was beginning to manifest itself from one end of the country to the other. Disputes had arisen, and they had not been settled. The Employers’ Association was forcing its members to take advantage of the Act and force down wages and living standards. The Arbitration Act had been reduced to a farce.

Alter several Labour members had spoken in support of the measure the Hon. A. Hamilton said that quite a number of agreements had been reached since th- passing of last session’s amendment, and it was likely in those cases in which an agreement hud not

yet been reached that it would ulti wately bo arrived at. The bill was “talked out,” tljc discussion being interrupted bv the ad jouruiucut of the House al 5.80.