COMMONS OPPOSES CONCILIATION PLAN

Manawatu Times, Volume LII, Issue 3626, 16 June 1927, Page 9

COMMONS OPPOSES CONCILIATION PLAN

New Clause Proposed for Trade Union Bill BUT WITHDRAW AFTER DEBATE [By Electric Cable-Copyright.] [Aust. and N.Z. Cable Association.] LONDON, June 14. ■ In the House of Commons during iho Committee stage on tho Trades Union Bill, Sir L. Scott, IC.C. (Cons.), proposed a new clause making it illegal for any strike or lock-out to lake place in ’an essential Industry prior to, or during the reference of the dispute to a conciliation tribunal. This, ho said, was an attempt at something constructive in the ' direction of a settlement of disputes. Mr. J. R. Clynes (Lab.) said that if tho Government wanted industrial harmony, it would have to proceed on the lines of the new clause instead of tho introduction of the Bill which had gone too far to crush the spirit of conciliation. Mr. Lloyd George (Lib.) agreed that it was unfortunate to link safe conciliation proposals with such a provocative Bill. If the Government introduced a Bill along the lines of Sir L. Scott’s proposal, it would bo worth tons of Trade Union Bills. Sir Alfred Mond (Cons.) disagreed with tho previous speaker, and said that the now clause was inconsistent with the Sill. Sir L. Scott’s proposal followed the legislative provisions in the Dominions, which had avoided numberless strikes. He hoped that Britain would eventually adopt compulsory arbitration like Australia. Mr. Hartshorn (Lab.) said that If the Government wanted conciliation let it scrap the Bill ,and Labour would then help them to And a better way of dealing with disputes. Sir A. R. Steel-Maitland (Cons.) said that, though It would welcome machinery to prevent disputes coming to a head, the Government could not accept an amendment it did not desire. It could not do more than deal with the situation arising from the general strike and it did not wish to go further in preventing the right to- strike than in tho avoidance of a recurrence of last year’s trouble. Sir A. R. Steel-Maitland offered, if the new clause were withdrawn, to have a committee appointed to consider tho Improvement of industrial conciliation machinery. Lieut-Commander Kenworthy (Lab.) said that this was the most useful day that had yet been devoted to the Bill. He believed that compulsory conciliation, as tried in Canada and Australia,- must be attempted here. Sir A. R. Steel-Maitland said that he could not commit himself as to the terms ,of reference, hut tho Government was willing to go forward with the appointment of a committee, though he could not promise an appointment before tho Bill left tho House of Commons.

Mr. J. R. Clynes said that Labour would not accept the arrangement as a supplement instead of a substitution for the Bill. If it -wanted a really representative committee, the Goveminent ought to withdraw the Bill. Mr. J. Thomas (Lab.) said that no responsible Trade Unionists would sit on the Committee with the Bill hanging over them. Sir L. Scott’s new clause was then withdrawn. After the guillotine had been applied, the Committee stage of the Bill was concluded and the House adjourned. WORKERS WANT BEER, BUT GIVE PART OF WAGES TO FIGHT BILL, (Received Wednesday, 7 p.m.) LONDON, June 14. Labour members of the House of Commons made a suggestion that workers should abstain for six months from the use of alcoholic drink and tobacco as a protest against the Trade Union Bill. But this has been abandoned in favour of a scheme by which workers will contribute a fixed proportion of their wages in order to continue resistance to the Bill.