LABOUR IN BRITAIN.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20300, 6 July 1929, Page 13

LABOUR IN BRITAIN.

[UNEMPLOYMENT BELIEF

debate on proposals.

ATTITUDE OF LIBERALS.

PARTY TACTICS DROPPED.

MANDATE FROM ELECTORS

By Telegraph—Press Association— Copyright Australian Press Association—United Service (Received July 5, 8.15 p.m.)

LONDON, July 4. Hie debate on the Address-in-Reply was resumed to-day in the House of Commons. Sir Oswald Moslev, Chancellor of the Du'-hy of Lancaster, said the House had been elected to make a determined effort to deal with unemployment. If tho Liverpool Street electrification scheme were approved it would involve an expenditure of ' from £75,000,000 to £100,000,000. That woifld go largely to the steel trade. The late Government had sabotaged Lord St. David's Committee —one of tho most effective instruments for dealing with the unemployment problem. The new Ministry was setting that committee to work again. If the committee sanctioned schemes of public works at tho same rate as formerly it did there would bo employed on them 150,000 men a year. Challenge and an Explanation. Sir Laming Worthington Evans, late Secretary of State for War. said most of the Government's proposals were palliatives for unemployment. In order to mitigate hardships the real remedies were a reduction of costs and the provision of new markets. Sir' Laming challenged Sir Oswald's figures in regard to the Liverpool Street gcheme He said the work could be done for £12,000,000, After somewhat acrimonious exchanges Nr. J. H. Thomas,' Lord Privy Seal and Minister in Charge of Unemployment, was appealed to. He admitted that Sir Oswald had conveyed a wrong impression. He had meant to point out that the scheme for the electrification of the railways generally, if carried to a logical conclusion, might involve an expenditure of £75,000,000 to £100,000,000. Sir Herbert Samuel Reappears.

Sir Herbert Samuel (Liberal), in his first speech in the House since 1918, expressed the opinion that the vast majority of the people had voted consciously and deliberately for an active policy of social improvement and the promotion of ipternational peace. It would be shameful, and dangerous if party manoeuvres made the Government's mandate of no avail. The workers then would conclude that Parliamentary institutions were almost worthless. The House must recover the control of expenditure and the decisions of the Committee of Supply must not involve tho life of the Government. The Liberals asked for expedition for electoral reform, hut not for priority. Unemployment must have priority over everything. ITe said he hopsd that in the impending mining legislation the Government would adopt a cautious manner of dealing with the question of hours of work. Tlie Royal Commission had taken the view that wages and hours should be considered together. > Joint Councils in the Industries. Sir Herbert said he hoped the Ministry would consider the international aspect of the question, and the possibility of uniform action. The Royal Commission had attached importance to joint committees nt every pit to secure better relations between the employers and the employed. "Wo believe the labour question in essence is not only a matter of cash but of status," continued Sir Herbert. "The workers will not be content to remain serfs. Therefore, I think it most important, not only in the mines hut throughout industry, to have joint councils of emplovers and employees in every establishment." The debate was again adjourned.