The Arbitration Bill.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19141, 26 October 1927, Page 8

The Arbitration Bill.

The most interesting feature of the things that have so far been said about the Arbitration Bill is that they nearly all deal with the least important aspects. It is certainly important that the Court should he soundly constituted, and that its jurisdiction should be restricted to those industries already under the State's paternal care; but there is a more important consideration either of those. The really big (Question is ■whether the Court is still necessary or not, and it is not being frankly faced. Even the Minister, when he explained the Bill to the House, made it clear that he thought it outrageous for anyone to suggest that he would be a party to doing away with the Court altogether. But there is nothing outrageous in wondering whether the Court has not after all outlived its usefulness. -It is so definitely now a wage-fixing Board, with no power, and very little claim, to be anything else, that it is merely foolish to go on regarding it as permanently necessary to peace. It is extremely unlikely indeed.that its abolition would bring the heavens doAvn, but if it does hold the system together it does so by the exercise of powers which could still be exercised in other ways. The new Bill —and this is by far the most important provision—gives the Minister power, where a dispute has begun or seems likely, to summon the parties to a compulsory conference. But the surprising fact is that few know, or seem to realise, that this power already exists if disputes break out in industries not covered by tlje Arbitration Act, and could easily be extended to cover all disputes. "We have had a good deal to say lately about the Labour Disputes Investigation Act of 1913, but its provisions are still not widely known. Although it applies to those workers and employers only who are not bound by an award or industrial agreement, it is such an excellent Act within those limits that Parliament would be more usefully employed examining the advisability of extending it than in investigating any of the proposals of the present Bill. Broadly its principles are these: (1) That the Minister, as soon as he is notified that a dispute exists, shall (a) refer it to a Conciliation Commissioner, or (b) have it submitted to a Labour Dispute Committee equally representative of both sides; (2) that the Committee shall investigate and report, and, if a settlement has not been reached, include in its report such recommendations for a settlement as it thinks fit; (3) that the recommendations shall then be published, and a strike be permitted only after a secret ballot has been taken on the question of their adoption or rejection. But the 1 ballot shall not be taken until fourteen days have passed since receipt by the Minister of notice that a dispute exists, and, if the rei commendations are rejected, a strike

shall not begin until seven days have passed after the result of the ballot has been announced. That is to say, the dispute is compulsorily referred to public opinion for at least three weeks, and then, but not sooner, allowed to take its course. It is also provided that lock-outs shall be dealt with in the same manner as strikes, so that we should be by no means unprotected if the Arbitration Court were completely abolished and the Labour Disputes Investigation Act made universally applicable.