M.P. Says Federation Of Labour Is Delaying Final Order Of The Arbitration Court On Wages

Wanganui Chronicle, 1 November 1950, Page 6

M.P. Says Federation Of Labour Is Delaying Final Order Of The Arbitration Court On Wages

PARLIAMENT BLDGS, Last Night (PA).— Speaking in the debate on Imprest Supply, in the House of Representatives tonight, Mr. Tennent (Govt.. Palmerston North) said that the recent order of the Court of Arbitration increasing wages was only an interim order. It could be made a final at any time if the Federation of Labour applied for that to be done.

Mr. Tennent said only one thing was delaying the making of a final order. That was the Federation of Labour. If the Opposition was sincere in its concern for people supposed to be suffering hardship, it should tell the Federation of Labour to get on with its job. If the applications for a final order were made promptly, the Arbitration Court could probably give its decision before Christmas. An Opposition voice: What about the Public Service? Mr Tennent: They will be better treated than under a Labour Government. Mr Tennent said there might be : reasons why the Federation of Labour ; had not already applied for a final • order, but the Opposition might not wish to state those reasons in the I House. The Opposition should per-i suade the Federation of Labour to | apply to the Court and any anomalies could be remedied without further; delay. i Mr Tennent said that the whole economy of the country affected the cost of living, and not just a * ew commodities. Had the National Government found, when it took office, that everything was in order, it would ; most likely not have removed subsi-1

dies. So far as the cost to New Zealand of overseas goods was concerned the present high level would have to be accepted as permanent until sterling was again revalued. The Government found, on taking office, many things which business prudence demanded should be put right, and the curtailment of subsidies was one thing it was essential to undertake. It should be remembered that all subsidies had not been cancelled. A subsidy of 7s a bushel was still costing

i f 5.500,000 a year. The Government I could have printed more money or in- ' creased taxation, but that would have been in violation of its pledges. It chose the commonsense remedy of reducing subsidies. The Governmenl Statistician estimated the cost of living increase at 4 per cent, and the j Arbitration Court allowed a 5 per cent I increase in wages. “This party is very concerned about I the person on the lower income and ■ about age beneficiaries,’’ he said. “Legislation will be introduced that will show, in no uncertain terms, that | this party is very concerned about those on lower incomes,’’ said Mr Tennent. An Opposition voice: When? Mr Tennent: Before very long. He added That increased wages under the court order and the increases in benefits would cost £11,000,000 a year.