"A BREATHING SPACE”

New Zealand Times, Volume LII, Issue 12211, 8 August 1925, Page 5

"A BREATHING SPACE”

PARLIAMENT PASSES TEN MILLIONS FOR MINERS TO SAVE GREAT CONFLICT STRIKE WOULD HAVE COST OVER SIXTY MILLIONS . The coal subsidy* for which all parties expressed dislike, was approved by Parliament. It will cost ten millions, and may cost fifteen. Mr Churchill es timated that the alternative—a strike—would have cost sixty or seventy millions. The settle* meat, he said, was not final, hut a breathing space*

By Telegraph-—Press Assn.—Copyright. Beuter'e Telegram. (Received August 7, 7.20 p.m.) LONDON, August 6. The House of Commons was crowded and animated when Hr Baldwin moved the Supplementary Estimate for £lO,COO,OOO for the subvention to aid the wages of the coal mining industry. The Prime Minister said there was no means of avoiding the strike without temporary Government help, and he was still convinced the Government took the right and wise course. He had been called a coward. Well, it was much easier to he rattled into a fight than to be rattled into peace. They had been confronted with a great alliance of trade unionists, who had the power and the will to inflict enormous and irreparable damage on the country. Amid Labour criea of dissent, and Ministerial, cheers, Mr Baldwin said there was apparently a deliberate and avowed policy to force a stoppage, regardless of suffering. He was not aware if that policy was endorsed by the whole Labour Party. If that were so, he did not see how constitutional government could live. He had done his utmost last year to secure industrial peace, but if they were again confonted by such a challenge, “let me just say that no minority in a free country has * ever yet coerced a whole, community. ‘ ' 1 am convinced that if .the time comes when the community must protect itself with the full strength of the Government behind it, the community will do so, and the response of the community will astonish the forces of anarchy all over the world. I say this merely, as a warning, and I -know I am stating the deep, find fundamental, and widespread belief -of the vast majority of the great free people of this country.” ,’UBLIC BEHIND THE MINERS? Mr Ramsay MacDonald, Leader of the Opposition, said he regretted most deeply Mr Baldwin’s dosing sentences. He declared that anarchy had never occurred in anv State unless, in conditions caused by a feeble and’ reactionary Government. He asserted that public opinion had united mast extraordinarily against the coal owners, for posting the lock-out notices. The trade unions had to prepare their own de♦fenoe, and their extraordinary manifestation of industrial strength would be amply justified. Mr MacDonald admitted that toe situation last Thursday could only he met hy a subsidy, though he rejected the subsidy in principle. He believed the inquiry would find that national control of the mines was essential. ' Mr Lloyd George, Leader of the Liberal Party, declared that the bargain was practically nationalisation, with a Government guarantee, but without control. Mr Baldwin had been driven to tt by the threats of the direct actionists. Democracy would be doomed if it surrendered to compulsion by a minority. Mr Robert Smfllie (Lab.), one of the miners’ leaders, referring to the conditions in the countries with which British coal competed, said there was money invested m coal mines in .India , in which the conditions were similar to those existing in Britain ft century ago. There would be a revolution in Britain if the miners were ' forced down to such a position. \ CANNOT LIVE ON SUBSIDIES Sir Robert Horne (Con.) expressed the opinion that the subsidy could not

meet the difficulties, which arose from the condition .of industries in a world which the Government could not con-, tool. If the people were led to believe they could live on subsidies their plight next May would be worse than it was to-dav. ' Colonel J. Gretton (C0n.)... declared that the Conservatives were alarmed' by the surrender to foroe. The Government’s action would strengthen the position of the Communists and of the extremists within the trade unions. He hoped the Government would give an assurance that its policy wonid not he one of subsidies. Mr J. R. dynes (Lab.) said . the Prime Minister’s speech had cast an unwarrantable aspersion on the workers, who bad their backs to the wall. The miners would have been craven cowards if they had not resisted these wage reductions, and the rest of the workers would not have been worthy of the name of comrades if they had" failed to stand behind them. NO NEW TAXATION Mr Winston Churchill, replying to the debate, said it was agreed that the settlement was not final, but a breathing space secured in ithe hope that the community would be spared a conflict. The subsidy might : amount to £15.000.000. , They must ensure that the time was well spent, and that the sacrifice., of money was not made without achieving an effective advantage. . Nobody liked the subsidy, but fewer would' have liked a general stoppage. The Government’s decision, therefore, was in the best interests of the public. He had not provided for the subsidy in the Budget, but he did not intend to propose new taxation. The matter could bo considered when the next Budget, was framed. MINERS NOT “RED* The miners’ wages had not been raised above the pro-war figure to the extent that the wages in other and less dangerous occupations had. The Government declined to discern in the miners’ resistance any' wish to challenge the State. There was a challenge, from a force deliberately working to promote discontent. It would be a great mistake to identify the masses of his fellow-countrymen with those forces, which were inspired by foreign propaganda. .Parliament must also , be protected from the threat of the trade unions. It must not; bo suppdsed, because the Government worked for peace, that it was incapable of defending a great-institution. A section of the Liberals challenged a division on the Supplementary Estimate. which was adopted by 351 votes to 16. MUST NOT OCCUR AGAIN Australian' and N.Z Cable.' Association. Political writers ngroo that the House was greatly impressed by the speeches of Mr Baldwin and Mr Churchill. They especially draw attention to Mr Churphill’s declaration that the strike would have meant a loss to the revenue of at least 60 or 70 millions, apart from its indirect effect on trade, credit, and exchange. The editorials: practically unanimously express the opinion that the Government has chosen the lesser of two evils. They emphasise the uncertainty of the future, and the necessity of ensuring a thorough inquiry. Finally, they insist on the protection of the public against a similar hold-up.