MINISTER REBUKES EX-MEMBER OF WATERFRONT COMMISSION

Wanganui Chronicle, 30 June 1948, Page 4

MINISTER REBUKES EX-MEMBER OF WATERFRONT COMMISSION

Respect For Constitutional Authority "Shown Too Late"

Wellington. June 29. Mr. R. J. O'Donnells opinion that 'the present trouble at the port ol’ Auckland should have been avoided at all costs.' will not be shared by any impartial observer, said the Minister of Labour (Mr- McLagan) tonight "That opinion does not seem to have been held bv Mr. O'Donnell himself when the dispute commenced, as this is the first time he has expressed an opinion that the demands of the persons responible tor this and other disputes at Auckland port should be conceded 'at all costs.' ” continued Mr McLagan. “The cost of appeasing the gentlemen who aspire to run not only the waterfront industry but the whole of New Zealand, and its external affairs as well, might be high. They, like Mr. O'Donnell, are always ready to point out the economic loss thev will cause if they are not appeased. “Mr. O'Donnell, who walked out of the Waterfront Commission because it allegedly was not making decisions fast enough, and who walked in again only to resign because the commission made a decision, says the Auckland refusal to work is a lockout. He might as well claim that his own walk-out was a lockout“If anyone really believes that, the present dispute on the Auckland waterfront is a lockout, the matter can be tested in an appropriate place at any time. Officials of the Auckland Waterside Workers' Union alleged that refusal io work the Mountpark was a lockout, and they laid an information to that effect against the employers- When the case came before the Court they unconditionally backed down, and abandoned the charge. That admission, that it is not a lockout, speaks louder than Mr. O'Donnell’s feeble assertion that it is. “As Mr. O'Donnell has made a number of unfounded charges against the Waterfront Commission and against the Government, I am publishing a letter I wrote him in reply to his letter forwarding his resignation from the commission,” said Mr. \'.-I«’.san. Mr. McLagan's letter to Mr. O'Donnell, which is dated last Friday, reads: “I am in receipt of your letter of even date and note you have given up your indefensible attitude of attempting to remain a meirmer of the Waterfront Industry Commission while not only refusing to take any part in the commission’s work but actually obstructing it In the performance of its duties. I regret to I learn from your letter, however, that your resigpation is not prompted by I

realisation of the untenable nature of your position, and that you are claiming an entirely different motive for your resignation. I agree with your statement that ‘when the commission was established it was ciearlv understood by al parties that the commission would be the arbitrator and arbiter on all questions affecting the waterfront industry,’ but you are much too late in making it. In my presence you have listened to the denials of the commission’s authority from union officials, and have not on y refrained from defending the authority of the commission, of which you were a member, but have sympathised with persons attacking the commission. It is therefore idle for you to allege that you tender your resignation because you consider the commission has not sufficient authority.

“Your allegations that I have overridden the Commission and that a decision to make the Mountpark a preference ship was made by the Government are equally baseless The statement you have attributed to Judg* Dalglish in this connection is denied by him and is contradicted by tho facts. So far from the Government requesting that the Mountpark be declared a preference ship, the position is that the employers, from the inception of the unjustified holdup of this ship, have been asking for it to he declared a preference ship .and the Government, has suggested such action might, if the Commission so felt, be withheld in the hope that reason would prevail and the Government’s proposals for a settlement of the dispute be accepted. You have been very well aware that for some time union officials have preferred to discuss proposals for a settlement of this dispute with the Government rather than with the Commission.” Mr. McLagan’s letter continues: “The Government has been reluctantly compelled to conclude that appealing to reason is not likely to produce any useful results in this dispute, and on receiving a further recommendation that the shin be declared a preference ship it intimated to the chairman of the Commission that it would he guided entirely by the Commission’s decision in that -matter. “The only further comment I would make upon vour letter is that it is to be regretted that vour newlv found respect for constitutional authority was not developed much earlier.”