MR FRASER REPLIES TO STATEMENTS BY WATERSIDERS’ LEADER

Wanganui Chronicle, 22 January 1947, Page 4

MR FRASER REPLIES TO STATEMENTS BY WATERSIDERS’ LEADER

(P.A.) Wellington, Jan. 21. “In view of the fact that my letter of January 17 to Mr. Hill, national . secretary of the Waterside Workers' Union, has been the subject of ambiguous comment by the president of the union, Mr. Barnes, comment which might be construed in a misleading sense, it is necessary to point out that the letter was not in any way part of an agreement, or even an understanding," said tne Prime Minister, Mr. Fraser, in a statement to-day.

‘‘lt was a plain statement of the circumstances under which normal work would be resumed. It was a restatement of the position contained in my letter of December 20 to Mr. Hill. In that letter I wrote:

'“Following on the pronouncement, it appears that action was immediately taken by certain branches of your union to limit the hours of work to a five-day 40-hour week, without any attempt being made to discuss the matter either with the Government or the commission. Had representations been made by your organisation to the Government at that time, discussions could immediately have been arranged with a view to examining the effect of the pronouncement. No order has yet been made, and these discussions can stili be held.’ “Indeed, as I stated to the representatives of the Waterside Workers' Union and Federation of Labour on December 19: “ 'The matter could have been discussed the very first day the commission met after the issue of the pronouncement and the present trouble avoided.' “EFFECTIVE REPLY” “In my letter of Friday last, January 17. the statement that: “ ‘The Government stands for a steady improvement as economic circumstances permit in the conditions of all wage-earners and of people generally,’ was an effective reply to a question apropos the transfer of labour as to whether the Government stood for ‘worsen ng conditions.' “It was made perfectly plain in the discussion that the Government stood for neither a worsening of conditions nor a perpetration of practices which might be detrimental to the efficiency and operation of the waterfront industry. My letter of Friday last set forth the full circumstances of a return to normal work on the waterfront. There are no other conditions, nromlses, or 'basis of principles,' the term used by Mr. Barnes. My letter may have been laid on the table—a very suitable place for any letter, even an important one—but it obviously also laid to heart, as I hope will be the lesson of an avoidable, unfortunate period of six weeks, involving great loss to the country and the workers concerned. without achieving anything other than what was obtainable imme-’iately without any action whatever.”