WHY MR. BARNES WAS ORDERED OUT

Chronicle (Levin), 17 May 1947, Page 7

WHY MR. BARNES WAS ORDERED OUT

—Press Assoeiation

MINISTER GIVES HIS VERSION OF AFFAIRS

Rv Telearanh-

WELLINGTON, May ' 16. Gommenting today 0,11 the allegation tliat the national executive . of the Watevside Workers ' Union had been ordered out of his room, the Minister of Labour, Mr. McLagan, said that' the facts of the matter yvere that when, the waterside workers ' reprcsentatives arrived to meet him on Apfil. 30 they brought a stenographer wjth them for the purpose, they said, of, takihg a-te-port of the proceedings" They.; were told by the Minister. that this was contrary to all custom .and he, could not agree to.it. The Minister was then accused of uSing :■* 'Star Chamber" methods. Diiring the' subs.equent ' discussions further . eharges were made' that the Government .was only payihg lip service to the idea of worker par ticipation in the- sontrol of . the industry and that waterside workers were bcing asked to "carry the^ baby " a"nd to incur the risk of substantial losses'. The latter assertion had beefi- ,mad.e several tinies previously and on each occasiou the Minister had offbred -to give the waterside workers .any reasonable and practicable safeguard agains'tthe possibility of such losses, but regardless of that. offer the charge was; repeated. . • ' v. -T During the discussion of the. Government 's proposal for' the estabjishineht of a Waterfront Conimission' bf fOur members (two representing the Gov,efn: meut, one representing ihe union ahd: one the shipowners) the proposal vvas? described by Mr. H. Barnes." as riot genuine. ■ * The Minister took ^exception tp .^hat statement. klr. Barnes denipd havfng made it and was asked by' the Minister to repeat what he had. actually said. Mr. Barnes did so and ag'ain said thatthe Government 's proposaf \ was notj: genuine. 1 v 7"* The Minister. again . prpfpsted ' aqd. again Mr. Barnes denie'd 'hayihg"m"ad$' the statement. .• . \ So that there would be no. possil>le doubt about what be had, actually Said,' the Minister asked him to' ohce more/ repeat his statement and/ again M'r.Barnes said the Goyernnieht's propoSal was not genuine. • ' ? v ., As it was obvious by that time that Mr. Barnes was not conhe'rued vvith taking part in a rbasonabie; disCuSsion for the purpose of tryihg to :reachy.aii agreement on the matter, the • 'Miuisior said that he could hot cai'ry on ih6 discussion on those terins when -the :Goy-. ernment's proposal was described *as» not genuine, that he was not going to carry on an altercation with- tby union's delegates, hnd that- the; iijtter-; view was accordingly fini'shed. ' The Minister then asked his- secre-; tary to open the door and ;thp tdelega-. tion left the room. •. . ' ' In connection with ■ Mr. Barnes repeated denial of his statement, it is interesting to remark that at a meeting with the Prime Minister and . otlief members of Cabinet on, May 15, - Mr. "■ • • • * ' - ■

Barnes admitted having described the t Ministef as not genuine. Buch a re--inark would have been thoroughly in k'e'eping with Mr. Barnes'. well known Standard of - courtesy but actually he [ciid' not. go so far at the meeting on April 30. _ He did, however, go mueh 't'arther in an abuse of the Minister, GftVerument generaily, and officers of the Jj'ederatiou of Labour, in an article , he published on May 6, which had been >vritten before the meeting on April 30. It should be pointed out that the Gov.ernmeiit's proposal for a Conimission oi foiir members was not the Government '3 last word on that subject. It was made clear by the Minister oi Labour that it was put forward as u basis for discussion and that it was opeh to .amendment if a niore suitabie cuiumission could be devis^d. "At an earlier meeting on April 18, at Which the question of re-establishing ..the Waterfront Conimission was disicuss'ed, Mr. Barnes proposed, on behaif ,-.of - the union, tliat the Conimission should consist ofv f our members, three "rdpresenting the union and one the\ Gov;e"rnment. Under such a set-up, yvith its delegates in eoniplete control "of 'the Waterfront Comniission, the 'union would itself decide the rates of pay.-for its members. would fix the con;ditions of employment of its members, and by nieans of the judicial power of ■ the Conimission, the union would itself ..d'etermi'ne the terms o'f settlement of any dispute brought before the Com-tmi-ssioxi. The Minister considered that •"proposal qujte inipracticable and said .that it was not acceptable but did not ishy it' was not genume. '..Another proposal made by the uiion 's- delegates was that at any port 'where'the extended form of contract. vwork was adopted, the union alone should have the right to lix the con,tfhct rate to be paid, the Government and shipowners to have uo voice in the ■ matter. The Minister remarked tliat .tbxs . would probably resuit in the conth;act rate being lixed by the highest bidder at a stop-work meeting and that .it,; could not be agreed to by . the -.(iqVernment, but did not deseribe it as ndt genuine. ,>T"n May 9 the Minister received a • lett.er signed by Mr. Barnes stating that a meeting of the Auckland Water'si'dp Workers' Union had expressed ebhlfplete conlidence • in the national officers and executive and had invited •tht5 -Minister to attcnd a meeting of the ' hnibn to show cause why a motiou &i >ho-c6nfidence in him as Minister oi Labour, should not be carried. On thi /sqihe • day. the Minister replied stating .that fhe. discussion of such a motion at .Bxiqeeting of his iinipn would be inelfectiye; but there were two meetings to be : neill in a few weeks' time — the annuaJ Coiif erence of tne New Zealand Eeder afiqn of Labour auc^ the anuual con 'ference of the ;New Zealand Labour L.arty— at whiclL-a rcsolution of that .nature, could h^g,. a decisive eli'ect. Accordingly the plinister invited Mr. JBatnes to place his motion before those eoqferences. Mr. Barnes ' reply has not "ot been received. ; At a meeting >vith the Prime Minis ter'and Cabinet niem'be'r^, on May 15 a fpquest ' \y;as .recefyed frbm the Water-" siders' Union ' which would niean, in effect, the setting aside and ultimate removal of the Minister of Labour. The Brime Minis ^i^replied that he and ,^isj|3§binet cqpepguBs had full coufideuce in the TMimbtgr of Labour and had never had- g^ieater conlidence ' in Biin than now. At the same time the Priine Minister asked the waterside ..Workers' executive to resume their ,dis- ' cqskibn -M'gh thTMin;i5te% on :the su bjqet"b,i'i;tlle •; VVfiCfcerf rdnt Comniission ; ah^i.' hx^euded .4,g.plitriict ■ work. Mr. JUarues,. ^Ujgges.ted'- tliat the Comniission syslein -6'f j ^contro'f might . be abandoned and- that * they go.Jback'to the National ■ Disputes Committee systern and deal directly with the shipo-whers. The Prime Minister said that while the Government would not agree to the introduction of a syndicaiist form of con tfoi in any industry, it wanted to b'riiig about worker representation in the- management of the waterfront in dust'ry. The Government wanted to establish a representative waterfronl Commission 011 a reasonable and practicable basis and would also lilte water side workers to consider favourably theadoption of a systom of work 011 the waterfront which. would give them a greater interest iii the loading and un • loading of ships and a greater reward in return for tlie increased interest and efficiency resulting from that direct personal interest. The executive indicated that they would discuss thr Prime Minister 's suggestion and would advise him of their decision later. "