ARBITRATION BILL.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19175, 5 December 1927, Page 8

ARBITRATION BILL.

ONE CLAUSE LEFT. A COMPROMISE. CONFERENCE IN RECESS. WELLINGTON, December 4. Tho fate of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill was determined in the House of Keprcsentatives on Saturday night. What was practically a new Bill was passed, providing . tha' no award relating to farming, or to the manufacture rff butter, cheese, etc., can be made before September Ist, 1928, and for tho maintenance of existing awards. A statement was made by the Prime Minister that during the recess a conference wiuld be held of representatives of the employers, the employees, and the Government. Mr Coates said that when the Bill was in Committee some time was occupied in discussing the question of holding a conference of the employers and employees, so that the whole question of the Dominion's industrial position might bo enquired into. A stage arrived when it was necessary for him as Leader of the House to intervene, and tho suggestion was made by him that if it was the universal desire of all shades of political opinion that the conference should be held, tho Government was agreeablo to that course being followed, On condition that tho Bill should be allowed to go on the Statute Book, but that its provisions should not be operative until Parliament had again dealt with the question. It was the view of the Government that tho provisions in the Bill would meet the position, and give the relief that was asked for by the farmers. Costs had landed the farmers in such a situation that many of them were finding it difficult to get on, and, what was Worse still, farming as an industry was not being sought after as it ought to be. For that reason it was thought J hat anything that would arbitrarily fix costs on the farmer without reference to_ him was leading the country into a position that called for immediate relief, and the steadying up of tho influences that were bearing upon the farmer.

The New Clause,

The Prime Minister said that while the Government's majority was such that it could impose its will on the House, nevertheless, there had been a general expression of opinion from all sides of the House that, the measure should be postponed. With the desire for a conference ruling in the House, the Government had considered the matter very carefully, and had asked the Labour Party, as the official Opposition, f» go into the mattor also. Following several discussions, a clause was drafted as follows: "Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the principal Act, no award relating to any agricultural, pastoral, or dairying operations, or to any othor work effected on a farm, or to the manufacture or production butter, cheese, or other products of milk, or to persons engaged (whether as employers or workers) on a farm, or in such manufacture or production, shall "iter the passing of tins Act be made'at anv time before September, 1928. Nothing in the preceding subsection shall operate in any manner to terminate any award in force on the passing of this Act, and every such award shall continue in force as if this section had not been passed, save that no such award shall bo in any maimer amended or extended before Septemher 1928." Accompanying the new clause were proposals for the deletion of the remainLg clauses in the Bill, including the provision for payment by results, and the matters to be taken into consideration bv the Court on fixing an_ award. "The clause referred to takes the place of the Bill," said the Prime Minister. "It is the Bill. It means that the status quo will be maintained, but that the Arbitration Court will not be.able to deal in any way with the farming industry until September Ist of next year. It was difficult to fix a definite date, but September Ist next had been decided on because by that time Parliament will have had another opportunity of considering the position. | Agreements Permitted. Mr Coates said that the other side i asked that no industrial agreements should bo made, but immediately they touched that question it affected the whole principle the Government had in view. "All that wo are concerned about in the meantime is that the Arbitration Court shall not arbitrarily fix any agreement relating to one side or the other, but we are entiroly in favour of conciliation, and of the Conciliation Council, which can summon either Party to a conference or to the Council itself," continued the Prime Minister. ,i. t , Mr Coates went on to discuss tho conference which is to be held during tho recess, between employers and employees, and the Government. Some wnnted to postpone the effects of conciliation altogether. That, he thought, would be a mistake, and it was not the intention at all. They all know that a large majority of the House favoured any method of conciliation. They were genuinely concerned about both the worker and the employer, and anxious to seo if they could mutually enter upon this work, which wns a huge work, and meant a separate organisation. It meant an organisation in which they could have tho services of some of tho best men in the country jn order to make it a success. As to the method and the general course to be adopted, it would be for the Government to set to work and sketch out tho gonoral idea, and tho method of carrying it out. The Government were anxious that members of Parliament should bo associated with them in their work, but the final responsibility must rest on the shoulders of tho Government. He himself realised that some members of Parliament would bo disappointed. No doubt they would be ready to complain about himself, but he would be ready to take the responsibility in that respect. It had been through a sincere desire to do the best that they had been actuated. "It is a huge undertaking that lies in front of us," concluded the Prime Minister. "So far as the Government is concerned, I hope thnt it will have sincere helpers and workers in that connexion." The Leader of the Opposition (Mr 11. E. Holland) said the final responsibility in connexion with the proposed conference must rest on the Government, but members on the Opposition side were prepared to co-operate with the Government in working to a success. He felt that if the conference were convened it would make it possible to place legislation on the Statute Book, which would be satisfactory to both employers and employed. When the Bill was in Committee the amendments proposed by the Prime Minister were agreed to.

"Sledge-Hammer it Through." Then Mr J. G. Eliott (Oroua) brought forward his amendment, making the inclusion of the preference to unionists provision conditional upon agreement by all the parties to be bound by the award. The Leader of the Opposition said the clause was not in accord with the agreement arrived at, and he protested against it. He hoped Mr Eliott would drop it. Mr Eliott said he had not been consulted in any way, although ho knew an arrangement was being made. He had interviewed the Minister for Labour, and told him that the original Bill was an important measure, and for his part he (Mr Eliott) would sledgehammer it through the House. Seeing the way things were going, however, he was quite prepared to fall in with anything the Minister might wish. Ho was not aware that any arrangement had been made that his amendment should not come before the House, and he could not allow any charge of unfairness to bo levelled against him by the Leader of the Opposition. Under the circumstances he was willing to withdraw the clause, and to bide his time until the Bill came forward again next session. The amendment was withdrawn, and the Bill was reported to the House.

Mr Lysnar Charges "Weakness." Speaking on tho third 'reading, Mr Lysnar (Gisborno) said ho was pleased with the result. He sympathised with the Prime Minister in his difficulty, but all the work put into the Bill had now beon lost. Members: No. Mr Lysnar said the whole question would have to be gone over again next session. The farmers voiced their opinions with no uncertain sound, and did not ask for the present postponement. Members: Some of them. Mr Lysnar said they were not genuine farmers' representatives. The farmers depended on the House to protect them, and if a .large conference of all interests was to be called, including the labour and employers' • organisat'o::':, then the farmers would be overwhelmed. The conferouco would be a failure, and he thought they would have nothing to do with it. The weakness was in the Keform Party members. A member: They compromised. Mr Lysnar repeated that in such a matter there should bo no compromise. It was a question of right or wrong. The genuino .farmer had no quarrel with Ills workers, and all the trouble occurred through the agitators who went out to the farm and stirred up men. Mr J. S. Dickson (Parnell): Would you object to the farmers joining an employers' organisation? Mr Lysnar: "I would." Ho added that he considered it a great pity that the Minister had not stuck to his Bill. Unfortunately thero werq a lot of weakkneed members supporting the Prime Minister. (Laughter.) The Minister for Labour (Mr Anderson) asked if Mr Lysnar thought he felt pleased because his Bill had not gono through. Mr Lysnar: I sympathined with you. The Minister: "Then you turn round and call me weak!" He was a poor man, he continued, who could not look at every side. The farmer under the amendment would be in a better position, pending the conference, which would have been held in any ease. The Bill was passed.