STORMY DEBATE ON BILL

Chronicle (Levin), 7 October 1948, Page 8

STORMY DEBATE ON BILL

Press Association)

Government Accused Of Seeking Yoles

(Per

WELLINGTON, Oet. 6. Their earlier objections to the direet representation of waterfront indjistry workers on Ilarbour Boards, jvere renewed by Opposition speakers when the Harbours Amendment Bill was discussed in committee in tlie House of Representatives tonight. 'The second reading debate on the Bill was talcen some weeks ago and the Bill had sinee been referred to the local bills committee. Mr. S. W. Smith (Hobson, Opposition) said it was clearly the wish of most who gave evidence to the committee tliat the Ilarbour Boards should be eleeted on a democratic basis. The direct nomination of representatives of one section of the workers was a negation of democracy -and clearly had not been c-alled fcr by the publie. ^ Mr. J. N. Massey (Franklin, Opposition) said it had been clearly established in committee that the Harbour Boards themselves had not asked for this legislation. It appeared that the Government had received its instructions froxn the Federation of Labour. Federated Farmers and other organisations which gave evidence were aDsoiuteiy hostile. to the -iaea of sectional representation on Harbour Boards. hlr. C. H. Cliapman (Wellington Central, Labour) said the Opposition 's belief in democracy was entirely spurious. The Opposition was stronglv opposed to worker representation on Harbour Boards on the grounds that it was not democratic. Mr. W. A. Slieat (Patea, Opposition) said members were being asked to vote for something entirely opposed to the unaniiuous recomniendation of the Local Government Committee. Mr. Ii. M. Macfarlane (Christchurch Central, Labour) said the Opposition was harping 011 the same string — that if the reeonimendation were brought down by tlie Local Government Committee, the Government sliould be bound by it. Mr. T. L. Webb (Rodney, Opposition) said the Bill was designed to help the Government 's "new iook" poiicy, as defined by a Minister of the Crown at New Plymouth, that in order to remain in office it had to cuitivate and retain the support of workers whether the methods were in line with democratic principles or not. Hon F. Hackett said that if the ports of this country could be improved by clianging Ihe constitutioh of Harbour Boards, tlien that change was warranted. iTen of specialised knowledge should be ti valuable addition to tlie boards. There were 011 Haibour Boards today some men who would not know salt water from fresh even if they saw a salt Avater fish swiniming in it. The evidence to the committee had been that some country members of Harbour Boards frankly regarded board meetings as an occasion for a day oif in town. N1 r. Oram: Is that the red herring from the salt water? Mr. Hackett said producers were well represented on the present boards. There were about oi ftinuers on boards throughout tlie country. Mr. Corbett: By democratic vote. Mr. Haekett, answering references to his New Plymouth statement, said: "I will say on any platform at any place in the Dominion that ' any Government which has passed the beneficial progressive legislation this Government has one desire — to remain in power and continue with its programme rathel than capitulate to an unsympathetic Opposition." IMr. J. T. Watts (Rt. Albans, Opposition) said that because tlie Government hojied to get the support of the militant unions, it had brought doivn a Bill which eontained a provision contrary to the recomuiendations of some Government members. not oue of whom had yet given an explanation as to whv they had clianged their minds. H011. W. ,E. Parry said the Opposition could not hope to get the vote of the working class because they had maligned tlie workers throughout the country. There was so wide a difCerenee of opinion 011 the matters discusseil by the Local Government- Committee, that he urged a eompromise rather tlian have the discussions break down. The recommendations were made as a basis for discussion only. Nothing would have been done unless there was some eompromise an.l he was convinced that 110 great principle had been broken. Mr. W. A. Bodkin (Central Otago, Opposition) said the Minister 's explanation was the most amusing excuse he had heard in tlie last 20 years in the House. The major consideration was that the Government should hold office at all costs and the Bill was framed to placate the Communists on the waterfront because the Government would need their support at the next election. He said the Harbour Boards were not an industry but a form of local government and therefore representation should be by the democratic method. Mr. Ormond Wilson said that the provision for greater worker representation 011 Harbour Boards would inerease the efficiency of the boards and give a better incentive to the workers in the industry. After Mr. Bowden deprecated references hy the Minister of Marine to country memhers on Harhour Boards, the Acting Prime Minister moved that the question he put (on the short title) and when the results of the division were announced — closure was refused hy 34 votes to 33 — jubilant cries of "hooray," "dissolve," "resign" were heard from the Opposition benches. Shortly afterward, however, when the lists were further scrutinised, the voting was found to he 34-34 and the Chairman of Committees, Mr. Can', cast his vote with the Government. A further division was taken on the short title which was agreed to hy 37 votes to 34. Progress was repovted and the House rose at 10.40 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. tomoi'row when the debate pn the com-

mittee stages of the Bill will be continued, with the second reading debate on the Land Valuation Court Bill to follow.