LABOUR SPLIT

Wairarapa Age, 9 August 1926, Page 5

LABOUR SPLIT

OVER FEDERAL REFERENDA UNION BOSSES UP IN ARMS. POLITICAL LEADER DECLINES TO GIVE WAY. Trouble is developing in Australian Labour circles over the Federal referenda proposals. At a special Congress at Sydhey, the Federal Labour Par*: Leader (Mr. Charlton) who supports the proposals, found himself opposed to industrial representatives who denounce them as an attack on trade uniartifwn, (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) (Received Sunday, 5.5 p.m.) SYDNEY, August 7.—A special AllAustralia Labour Congress called by Mr Willis, with the object of securing united party action in opposing Mr. Bruce’s referenda proposals, after hearing an explanation by Mr. Charlton, Leader of the Federal Parliamentary Labour Party of his reasons for supporting the proposals, adopted a series of resolutions condemning the referenda by 144 votes to 10. The resolutions further instructed every member of the Australian Labour Party to vote “No” to both referendum questions, also that the party would regard any collaboration with the Government in the subject, taken without a mandate from the trade unions, as an act of treachery against the working classes, meriting the : severest penalties the party could inflict. The Congress, which represents the industrial section of the party, emphasises the cleavage between that and the political section. Mr. Charlton, amid warm opposition, stoutly defended himself and refused to recede from the stand he had taken in favour of the referenda. He appealed for the unity of the two sections.—(P.A.) “DRASTIC POWERS.” WILL NOT BE GRANTED ANY GOVERNMENT. (Received Sunday, 5.5 p.m.) SYDNEY, August B.—The resolutions adopted by the Labour Congress declared that it was convinced that the Industrial and Commerce Bill containing the referenda proposals had been drafted by political representatives of the employing class for the purpose of destroying all effective trade union organisation and nullifying the important reforms introduced by the State Labour Governments, in particular the forty-four hours week, and that the Congress would not permit the assumption of such drastic power over trades unions by any Government, even a Labour Government.—(P.A.)