PREFERENCE TO SOLDIERS

Taranaki Daily News, 8 May 1930, Page 13

PREFERENCE TO SOLDIERS

RESTORATION IN AUSTRALIA GOVERNMENT AVERTS A CRISIS; RECOMMENDATION OF PREMIER. By Telefirajjh—Press Assn.—-Cepyrltht. Rec. 9.30 p.m. Canberra, May 7. Serious political consequences which threatened the Federal Government have been averted for the time being by the Prime Minister, Mr. J. H. Scullin, recommending to a caucus to-day the restoration of full preference to returned soldiers on public works contracts. The caucus approved, and an announcement of this character was later made in the House of Representatives,

Announcing the reversal of the Government’s decision, the Prime Minister said: “Our desire had been to safeguard conditions for returned soldiers. There was a danger that if returned men were not unionists they could bo employed for less than the arbitration award*rates and thus be exploited.” Mr. Latham, Leader of the Opposition, said the explanation was a bit thin. The Government’s hand had been forced and the speeches last Friday would not be readily forgotten. He hoped that this would be a lesson to the Government. Mr. Roland Green, who lost a leg in the war, bitterly attacked the Government. He said there was no such thing as preference for unionists at the war. “Labour let. us down then and afterwards,” he declared, “and apparently still possessed its hatred of soldiers.”

There were impassioned speeches in the House of Representatives on May 2 upon a motion tor the adjournment moved by Colonel Cameron to protest against the abolition of preference in employment to returned soldiers. He said that at least 85,000 returned men would be affected. He insisted that the Government was bound to stand by the returned men. It was nothing short of a scandal to make them play second fiddle to ordinary unionists who played no part in the war. _ The Prime Minister (Mr. J. H. Scullin) denied that the Government had abolished preference to soldiers. The policy of the Government was preference to unionists, and no returned soldier could be denied preference if he joined a union. Unionism had made arbitration possible. Arbitration was the policy of the country and preference to unionists was the policy of the Government. He understood that 80 per cent of the returned men were unionists. Without unionism it would have been “God help the returned soldier.” The people who shouted most for them had exploited and robbed them. Uproar followed, after which Mr. W. M. Hughes, defending the returned soldiers, said the Government had done a wrong and very foolish thing. The motion was talked out. Similar protests were made in the Senate.