MR. HOGG ON HIS DEFENCE.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 428, 10 February 1909, Page 6

MR. HOGG ON HIS DEFENCE.

!;":;-EwEWHEßE.:ye'print' two, statements.by ,'Mk. Ho(3Q, one of:which;he.made as Minister and Bridges,'; and ■ the: other as 'Minister: for Labour... It is difficult to docido .in, which .capacity he appears to least-advantage; , .both his 1 statemonts are; so, very latuo' and unsatisfac■tory.; It' is.regrettablo that tho ister,,■with.respect to the appointment of, .trades-union qfijcials to. posts in the Lab- ; our Department,' is chiefly;. anxious to jStiipoth;;awayv;the frowns', of. .Gomhade' iDpwDAiL.-andVthose.iwno, think,with-him..' .The public IB not concerned;as to'whether .the Government is'"picking the:'eyes' 1 ., of or not, nor'.doee the public expect its executive, servants to apologise to trades-unionism or to defend their actions, as unfriendly, to the agitators of thd' Trades :and":Labou'r ; .Councils.:' If ;Mr,.Hoqg but.knew it, the public,,is very. .tired of :the: eagerness; of the Government ;'to ; ayoid'.-incurring the;displeasureof the.■iihion's;':'it,is'begihriing.'to"feel'that, the. Government must ,bo taught that its masiter; is ;tho whole' 'public, arid not - a noisy ; section:bf it.:, ' ;i ",'"' : :'■'■':' ~' ■'■■;.''."■" : ; v; , - , pVHaving^madevhis' obeisance:to .the Com- ; ;eade;;Poatoalls;" ; the'•:Mimsteri'turned ;to :the. general public to explain why labour' are the most suitablo perscinsto ■ hold ; the; balance; fairly beWeen" master. ;ahd man. He argues.:that:the.civil'Beryice cannot; furnish ;the.. right sort of men for Inspeetorahips'in .the'L^bpur'Depart-: ment,..while; the trades-union 'official;.' is' specially qualified, to carry out the duties of inspeetor : by his .knowledge, of the ; technical side of industry and his practice in bringing ; cases bijfore the Arbitratiori ;i Court.,;,For 'the first oi-'theso argumbnts'.thero.is somothing'.to.be said, though an.'lnspeetor's duties are;not the duties 'of , an expert industrial deteotive. I The; qualities chiefly : necessary in him are ordinary'-intolligence, a sense ;of fairness,: I and a knowledge of- the-laws relating;' to' ■ihdustry.V No' abstruse'toohnicar.know- ■ ledge : is.' neoessary to elicit ; the ',simplo matters: of fact'upon, which, tho ' cases brought by -Inspectors are decided. Nobody doubts :that. ijhe trades-union'official is competent to;dpthe. ; actual, work of tho -Inspector,'; butj on the other-hand, 'few will.doubt l that a man who,has for years been:an : ardent opponent of- the. , whole employer class is, naturally ''inclined to: regard hie duty as Inspector as being confined 'to keeping, employers up to the >mark v : :,.Ono-of the ? speakers at the recent meeting of,the Trades Council declared indignantly ;that when a trades-union official ;..becomes an : . Inspector he is not '-'heart:and soul 'for' the workers." That, I represents : the general - feeling amongst trades-union officials as to what is proper conduct in an Inspector, arid how can an ex-official turned , Inspector forget that this feeling exists?' But it is for its general moral offec't on industry that.the Department's practico is to be deplored. It encoiirages the idea that the laws relating to'industry are devised.solely to,enable Labour to attack arid harass the iemploy-:, ors, and thereby obscures tho principle that "these; laws should deal fairly by both sides. : Mn.' HoQQ may not hayo j thought of this aspect of the matter, but , it is time itroceivod the attention of Min-. JEtora,. ; ■■-.■ .-; : ■; ■■•-.- ■;; ■■. ; :■., • •„■.■■: ■'

Not .less' , .unsatisfactory: was the Minister's, explanation of: his references to tho engineers in his Department; ■ ■-, Ho :■' says that the reported vorsion of his speech was; "fairly .accurate;"; but he; says also that it, "hardly conveyed his meaning.?' It is to'be. noted, howevor, that while ho goes off into a long rigmarole about engiricors m 'general, he docs not explicitly withdraw his original sweeping condemnation of his owri officials. Whether those officials aro coriipetcrit or not wo do not know..'What we do know is that it was highly impropor on Mb. Hogg's part to make a publio onslaught in generaland offensive terms; upon his subordinates. If tho Department's engineers. are incompetent, it 'is his businessio. get rid.'of thomand'dofend his action when called upon to do so. It is a sound and virtuous ■principle that underlies the rule thai a Minister must loyally defend his suboi'dinnteß until they aro proved undoeerv , j ing:of--.defenoe.'...,-i:.'-'''i'--:-' .--■ ■■; '~ ;- .y. •■'..