Workers Get Indigestion From Industrial Reforms

Northern Advocate, 18 March 1948, Page 3

Workers Get Indigestion From Industrial Reforms

WORKERS in New Zealand during recent years have received | an overdose of industrial reforms to an extent which they had not j anticipated and, as a result, some of them are suffering from j indigestion. |

Primary producers are in the same category, receiving since i 1935 more benefits than they can digest and, consequently, many j of them have been grumbling almost continuously.

Observations on these lines were made by Mr W. T. Anderton, J Labour M.P. for Auckland Central, addressing a meeting at; Portland last night. I

He spoke to an attentive audience of about 35. including half a dozen women. His address hinged mainly on the responsibility of industrial workers towards the community and the Dominion as a whole. Capitalism was attacked and he made frequent oblique references to Communism, although the word was not actually used until question time. The references to Communism were scathing and were designed to illustrate the dangers of the movement to the cause of industrial unionism. MIGHT LOSE EVERYTHING In the past 100 years great advances had been made by way of improved conditions and standards of living for the workers, but certain forces were going the right way to lose all that had been won. Mr Anderton said. He had not forgotten the miseries of the depression years and because of this he took a serious view of the critical situation in the world today. New Zealand could not be left out of the international picture.

"To combat it, vigilance and honesty I are needed.” he said. j “I may be bringing coals to New- , castle —or cement to Portland —but it l has taken 100 years for the worker to ' get his rights, and I would hate to see . him lose them, but it can be done un- , less he is kept alive to his duty to j the community,” Mr Anderton con- j eluded. I A questioner, disagreeing with Mr! Anderton’s statement that there was j relatively little industrial unrest in ; New Zealand, asked for an explana- j tion of the causes of industrial trouble j in the Dominion. !

l, We may insulate ourselves, socially, politically and economically, but we cannot isolate ourselves,” he said.

Tracing the many industrial reforms brought about since 1935, he said New Zealand had shown the way to the world in the development of its economic life and m the improvement of the standard of living. ‘‘But we have been given a plethora of industrial reforms and, in some industries, we have got indigestion. ‘‘The workers have been given industrial legislation which they had only dreamed of in the past, but I do not think we are making the best use of the intelligence with which we are endowed.” he added, commenting on industrial unrest.

“Sectionalism of any description must be subjugated in the interests of the whole nation. The nation must come first.” INDUSTRIAL STRIFE

In regard to the strength of trade unionism ,and the improved conaitions obtained for workers through Iheir unions ,he said these conditions could go much quicker than they came. This would happen unless certain sections of the community became fully alive to their responsibilities to the rest of the community. “We talk of industrial strife, but we don’t know what it is.

“We get pin-pricking occasionally by men who don’t think or who don’t face up to the facts. “It is not sufficient to be like an animal which sees the grass and eats it—we have advanced further than that.

“The Government is now faced with this situation: either it has to govern, to show people that it will govern, and to teach people that laws must he obeyed, or it cannot last long. “No Government can last unless the people obey its laws, whether they are civil, industrial or any other laws. “All the industrial legislation has been put there at the desire and behest of industrialists. “They have agreed to abide by it and. if they I'nink they can flout it, they have another think coming,” Mr Anderton declared. NEED FOR PRODUCTION “The Government has redistributed the nation’s wealth, which is produced by the workers and the only people who can reduce the wealth of the nation are the workers. “If they do .the nation must suffer by being robbed of something the people should have. If a section of people reduce the nation’s wealth they are robbing the whole nation of something. “The powers of reaction are at work today more strongly than ever before, and the world’s crisis is the soil in which reaction grows.

“We have spasmodic difficulties, i largely because of some people who j do not look back at history before they act,” Mr Anderton answered. | “I realise there is need sometimes I for industrial action and I would hate j to take away the right of the worker j to strike, but I expect workers to ] utilise their industrial power intelli- ! gently. “They can make their grievances; known and they can air their views ; without stopping the wheels of indus- j try,” he said. BIG STICK METHODS “Don’t you think you can iron these | things out by negotiations rather than | by the use of the big stick?” he asked, j ‘“Lots of the present Members of j Parliament did not think that way , years ago,” some one answered from j the audience. ] “They were then fighting their i bosses as well as the Government. which their bosses backed—but condi- . lions are different now. There is no ! need to fight the Government,” Mr J Anderton rejoined. j “Is there any case where the Government is not in step with the work-1 ers?” he asked. The answer was supplied without j delay. 1 “Yes. Mr McLagan struck two i clauses out of the Portland Cement j Workers’ award —that is a case where j the Government was not in step with j the workers,” replied another member j of the audience. WATERFRONT- DISPUTE A general discussion on the Port- j land waterfront dispute then opened, j Mr Anderton was asked why Mr : McLagan should accept and act upon i the Federation of Labour’s advice on . the Portland dispute, while the feder-1 ation's request for a tribunal in the: carpenters’ dispute was refused. | It was suggested that, in the Port- i land question, the strength of the j Waterside Workers’ Union had been j an influencing factor in the federa- j tion's recommendation to the Minister, j On the other hand, the Minister’s i refusal to set up a tribunal as re- \ quested by the federation in the car-; penters’ dispute, provided a contrast, j These were instances where the: Government was not in step with the i workers, it was claimed. , Mr Anderton said he was not fully: conversant with the details of the j Portland dispute but, if it was desir- j ed. he would investigate the question, j

The president of the Portland Cement Workers’ Union <Mr J. O'Connor), who was in the audience, intimated that the union had not considered taking the matter any further. As far as he was concerned,' the dispute had finished. ATTITUDE TO COMMUNISM

Asked about his attitude towards Communism. Mr Anderton said he believed every man should have the right to express himself and his opinions.

Nevertheless the actions of some of those who called themselves Communists were reprehensible. He felt any Government was justified in removing from important posts anyone v/ho might have ulterior or sinister purposes. The meeting concluded with a vote of thanks to the speaker and an expression of confidence in the Labour Party.