Noisy Opening Debate

Northern Advocate, 18 May 1949, Page 6

Noisy Opening Debate

WELLINGTON, Wed. (Sp.)— The Auckland carpenters’ dispute was the chief topic discussed at the Federation of Labour conference yesterday. Pressmen were not admitted, but a report of the proceedings was supplied by a press liaison officer. Mr J. Mitchell (Auckland Waterside Workers’ Union) criticised a portion of the annual report in which the president (Mr A. W. Croskery) had stated that every action taken by the national executive had been made with full regard to the constitution of the federation and the majority decisions of the annual and special conferences. Mr Mitchell asserted that the national executive had acted unconstitutionally in the dispute. Mr Mitchell, said he was chairman of the provisional action committee in Auckland., AMENDMENT LOST Mr R. Stanley, ot AucKiand, national secretary of the Carpenters’ Union, also claimed that the national executive had broken the constitution. He moved that the president’s annual address should lie on the table until the carpenters’ dispute had been discussed.' • The national secretary of the federation (Mr K. McL. Baxter) claimed that anj) decisions had been taken with full regard to the constitution. A motion that the question should be put for the adoption of the president’s report was carried by 112 votes to 37.

Mr G. Wells (Auckland Waterside Workers’ Union) asked if the national executive would take powers not provided by the ■constitution if the report was carried.

Mr Croskery:. Any organisation violating "the decisions of the conference will be isolated.

The amendment moved by Mr Stanley was defeated by 106 votes to 49. Mr A. B. Grant, secretary of the Canterbury Builders’ Union, questioned the proposed power of the national executive to break off relations with offending union officials. He moved an amendment designed to restrict this power to the national council. . There were some rowdy scenes when the 'national secretary of the Waterside Workers’, Union (Mr T. Hill) attempted to discuss the application for increased wage rates heard recently by the Court of Arbitration.

He was ruled out of order.

“The president’s address makes unions guilty without a trial,” said Mr Hill.

“You have sown a seed of hostility with some organisations which have taken action since the last conference to improve the conditions of their workers.”

Amid uproar, Mr Hill again attempted to refer to the wage application, but was again ruled out of order. He was refused an extension of time. Mr Grant’s amendment was defeated by 97 votes to 75. Unions which asked to have their votes recorded in favour of this amendment were: Waterside workers, New Zealand carpenters, tramway employees, Auckland carriers,-Auckland woollen mill workers, Wellington painters and Canterbury rubber workers. When the debate on the carpenters’ dispute was resumed yesterday afternoon, a legal opinion was read by Mr Croskery. This stated that, in view of proceedings to be taken in the Wellington Supreme Court on Friday, the whole matter was sub judice, and that while it could be discussed by the conference, any publication of statements could be considered contempt of court.