1.—98.

11

D, MCLABEN.

I regard the proposal in Part VI for a Government officer to take the ballots of the organization —I regard it as a gross insult to the whole of the trades-union movement in this country. It is practically telling the trades-unions of this country —and they feel it—that their officers are so venal that they cannot be trusted to take a ballot for their organization. 7. .l/r. Davey.] Ido not think that is the intention? —1 quite agree that is not the intention, but whilst that is not the intention that is the effect it has upon the minds of many of the workers and the trades-unionists of this country. It is an interference with the free organization which meets with a very great deal of resentment on the part of the unionists. 1 am perfectly sure of that. I do not propose to say any more. 1 am not going through Part VI clause by clause. I only want to make these few remarks, and say that it is positively certain that the passage of this legislation will not settle our present industrial trouble, and I am absolutely certain that it has such relations to the rest of the legislation of this nature that has been passed and is proposed—it has such intimate relations with it, and they are so complexly attached, one thing to another, that an attempt to push this through at the present time by itself will simply create further trouble instead of remedying it. 1 think it would be a wise course —an exceedingly wise course —to hold this whole Bill back, so that a Commission to inquire into and investigate the whole of the situation, and get the fullest evidence, can go into the matter in a comprehensive way, and then bring down something that would be of great value in guiding the Legislature. Pardon me adding one word on the ballot. There is a feature with regard to the ballot which I have lost sight of. One reason why unionism desires the control of its own ballots is this : that very often discussion precedes the taking of a ballot. In passing legislation you first discuss the proposals before you vote. That is a reason why the organizations themselves should have control of the taking of their ballot, because in many instances the ballot should not be taken without previous discussion. 8. Mr. Anderson.] You heard what Mr. Carey said about the Australian system as applied to such cases as these, in respect to unions outside the Arbitration Act : what do you think of it?—l agree with the views stated by Mr. Carey. I have a great admiration for the way the Commonwealth Act provides for the compulsory conferences. 9. You think it would do here all right? —Yes, 1 think so. 1 think it would have a good effect here. It would not prove absolutely satisfactory in every case, but we must not look for that sort of thing. If it gives sufficient satisfaction to keep the peace —that is what we want. 10. Over there, 1 understand, it is the Judge of the Supreme Court who calls these conferences ?—Yes. 11. Do you think the unions outside the Arbitration Court in New Zealand would favour that policy here? —Of course, it would be for some time experimental here, and it would depend altogether on the character of the man here —the Judge—and his mental and other qualities — perhaps on his liver —it would depend largely on that how they would regard the appointment. 12. Is there any other means you could suggest in this country by which this conference could be called than by the Judge of the Arbitration Court? —No, I think that the President of the Arbitration Court is the best man to call such a conference. 13. Hon. Mr. Millar.] What about our Conciliation Commissioners, who have powers under the Arbitration Act, in the first place, to hold these conferences? —That may act very well in regard to purely local disputes or disputes that are not of a great character—disputes that will not involve the whole country —then 1 believe it might be left in the hands of the Conciliation Commissioners. 14. Mr. Anderson.] Have you any idea how you would enforce these awards, supposing an agreement was not come to ? The Judge or chairman has to give his decision —how does the party not satisfied with that act—or, rather, how are the parties forced to comply with the decision ?—There are penalties, just as there are for breaches of award under our Arbitration Act. 15. There would be no ultimate means of compelling them other than fining them and enforcing fines to prevent them going on strike. 16. Hon. Mr. Millar.] As to our own Conciliation Commissioners, it seems to me that we have machinery enough in that respect if the powers of the Commissioners were extended; and my candid opinion is that the present dispute would have been settled if the Conciliation Commissioner had gone down when the dispute first started. Do you think he should be given the same powers in the case of unions not registered under the Arbitration Act?—l believe myself that if the Conciliation Commissioner had greater powers and authority, and had intervened at the early stages of the present trouble, it would have been all over now. 17. You would not have any objection to unions appointing scrutineers at ballots?—l think that would be the proper course —that the trades-unions should have the power to nominate their own scrutineers. 18. Both sides would have the right to appoint scrutineers? —Yes, I agree with that. 19. Do you not think that the most important evidence that could be given to this Committee would be the evidence of the men directly affected by this part of the Bill? —1 am absolutely certain of that. 20. Because the evidence we are getting now is all from members of unions under the Arbitration Court. That, of course, is good evidence in its way, but it is not the direct evidence of men affected by this clause? —Might I say this —I am speaking now as an ex-secretary of the Waterside Workers' Union—that I know by the means of direct negotiations they got advances which they could never secure under the Arbitration Act, and that is deeply embedded in the minds of these men, and therefore that is an incentive to them to be antagonistic to any suggestion to bring them under the Act; and it is fixed and rooted in their minds that they should not come under the Act. 21. Mr. Hindmarsh.] That is being put in the papers every day?— Yes. 22. Hon. Mr. Millar.] I suppose you have had experience of men coming out on strike without consulting any officials of the unions at all?— Yes.