THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES THURSDAY, June 24, 1937. SIR ORACLE AT GENEVA

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23225, 24 June 1937, Page 10

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES THURSDAY, June 24, 1937. SIR ORACLE AT GENEVA

Doubtless the Minister of Labour is finding the atmosphere of the International Labour Conference at Geneva congenial. He is certainly not losing the opportunity of speaking at the top of his voice. The question of the application of the 40-hour week being again under discussion, as it was twelve months ago when a motion respecting its adoption was rejected, Mr Armstrong has sought to project himself into the very forefront as a dominating authority on the subject. He was entitled, of course, to speak of his experience of the 40hour week in New Zealand, but it is unfortunate that in the manner and the matter of his utterance he should have shown neither good taste nor a sense of responsibility. From the cabled reports of his statements, it would seem that his attitude has been that of a Sir Oracle, one of whose chief concerns has been to argue against what British employers consider to be their interests, and generally to browbeat and put their representatives in their place. Perhaps it touched him to the quick to hear it suggested that the New Zealand textile industry is too small to permit of any value attaching to its experience of the application of the 40-hour week to it. New Zealand, retorted Mr Armstrong, might have lots to learn, but not from the British textile employers, and he advised them that if they could not make the 40-hour week pay they should come to New Zealand to learn the business. Such is British pertinacity, however, that the representatives of the British industry do not appear to have accepted defeat then and there, even in the face of this straight-from-the-shoulder, if slightly aggressive and tub-thump-ing, argument. Again Mr Armstrong has had to take the floor with fire and sarcasm. “ If you vote against the 40-hour week for the textile industry you are useless,” he declared. It may be apprehended that under the lash of such fine scorn certain of the Textile Committee delegates visibly wilted. Then Mr Armstrong proceeded to tell of all the blessings that the 40hour week has brought to New Zealand, how it has resulted in increasing incomes by millions with a proportionate increase in the demand for goods, how prosperity and increased spending are going hand in hand in our fortunate country, and so forth. A thin voice may have inquired what these remarkable revelations had to do with the British textile industry. It is hardly necessary to point out that there is a vast difference between the conditions in the textile industries at Home and in New Zealand. Apart from the dimensions of the industries in the two countries, which of course admit of no comparison, there is the circumstance that British manufacturers have to import the wool which Npw Zealand produces, and that they have to

meet a competition so fierce that the imposition of fresh costs upon them would subject them to a handicap so great that tiie very existence of their industries might be endangered. Even instruction from New Zealand might fail to save them. Mr Armstrong’s account of what the 40-hour week has done for New Zealand ranks him indeed among the romanticists. It deserves immortalisation for its humour. The effect would have been spoiled, of course, had he mentioned the five extra millions accruing to the country from the increased price of last season’s wool and to this being the main factor in the creation of the prosperity which he has been emphasising. Any reference to increased cost of living would likewise have been a tactical blunder. For the crowning argument, the appeal to humanity, was to follow; —in New Zealand “ tens of thousands of boys and girls leaving school are now absorbed in industry instead of walking the streets.” Who then would dare to repeal the 40-hour week? Mr Armstrong must certainly be given credit for a fine imaginative flight. Yet it is a pity that his picture should have been both exaggerated and misleading. The fact of the matter is, of course, that there is a definite youth employment problem in New Zealand and that far too many boys leaving school at an age at which they would most suitably be fitted into ihdustry are actually walking the streets as a result of legislation for which, as Minister of Labour, Mr Armstrong is himself responsible. To New Zealanders, acquainted with the facts, the whole attitude of Mr Armstrong in hectoring the British representatives at the Geneva Conference can afford neither pride nor satisfaction, if they have regard for the reputation of their country.