Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SYDNEY IN CHAOS

Public Anger Aroused Allocation Of Blame By Telegraph—N.Z. Press Assn.—Copyright (7.30 p.m.) SYDNEY, Oct. 13 There has been much “passing of the buck” over the Bunnerong dispute, which has now plunged Sydney into chaos. Mr Chifley (Prime Minister) has adopted the attitude that, as the Bunnerong men work under a State award, the Commonwealth Government can wipe its hands of the dispute. Mr A. McKell, State Premier, says that the settlement can only be effected by action under the National Security Regulations, which are controlled by the Commonwealth. The general public and the newspapers feel that the strikers themselves are initially to blame for defying the law, and that the Trades and Labour Council is now equally culpable. The Labour Council (representative of most New South Wales Unions) at first condemned the strike, but, when the men continued to defy the arbitration laws, it supported them. The president of the Labour Council (Mr G. Anderson) blames Mr Chifley for the breakdown of the negotiations. Mr Chifley has said he could see no reason why the Federal Government should interfere at this stage. Mr Anderson says that the Bunnerong dispute has very much to do with the Prime Minister. The existence of wartime regulations prevented the settlement of the dispute last week. Mr Chifley’s refusal to amend them was responsible for the breakdown of the negotiations. “The effect which this dispute will have on Federal revenue will be very considerable. For this reason it is very much Mr Chifley’s concern,” Mr Anderson adds. His contention is that the regulations could have been amended to provide for a lessening of hours without interfering with wage-pegging in any way.

The “Daily Telegraph” in a leading article headed “Australia cannot function without law and order" says: “Power and responsibility must be located together. Parliament which has to answer to the people for the administration of the country must also have the power to administrate. At present no Parliament has this power. Mr Chifley just cannot make Bunnerong work, but if the order and peace of this community break down, as they threaten to break down, and land us in civil war. then Mr Chifley will have to accept responsibility before his electors.

“We are only watching the beginning of our descent into confusion and violence. Unless the Government really make an effort, to recover their control over the industry and the nation, we will see many bigger and better Bunnerongs,” concludes the “Daily Telegraph.” One feature of the electricity rationing which has aroused public anger is the provision of a fine of £5OO for a breach of the regulations with a further penalty of £lO for each day the breach continues. The man in the street is asking is anyone going to fine the men. who are breaking the law and causing this trouble, £5OO each. Savage Penalties The “Sydney Morning Herald" says: “The penalties are savage. On a monetary basis they make the unlawful consumption of electric current one of the most serious misdemeanours that a citizen can commit. The State Government which prescribed them knows them to be out of any true relation to the nature of the offence.” The “Herald” urges the public to obey the regulations, but adds that it must be pointed out that Governments which require this sacrifice in the common interest are doing nothing whatever to compel respect for industrial laws. “There is one law for the striking unionist which can be disregarded at will, and there is another law for the householder necessitated by the striker's unpunished offence, a breach of which may involve a £5OO fine. What regard is to be expected for one set of laws, if another set can be successfully defied? What in such circumstances is likely to happen to law observance in general? Nobody asks Mr Chifley to ‘join in a crusade to crucify the workers,’ as he recently put it, but there are limits to the extent to which the public will consent to be crucified by industrial lawlessness.”

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/THD19451016.2.70

Bibliographic details

Timaru Herald, Volume CLVIII, Issue 23332, 16 October 1945, Page 5

Word Count
672

SYDNEY IN CHAOS Timaru Herald, Volume CLVIII, Issue 23332, 16 October 1945, Page 5

SYDNEY IN CHAOS Timaru Herald, Volume CLVIII, Issue 23332, 16 October 1945, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert