THE HOUSE.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 861, 6 July 1910, Page 4

THE HOUSE.

FUNDS OF INDUSTRIAL

umoNS.

MAY THEY BE USED POLITICALLY?

JHE HON. J. A. MILLAR SPEAKS y- ...;•■ PLAINLY.' When tho House mut yesterday afternoon, a proposal to lay upon the : table of^the House a return relating to industrial unions gave members an opportunity to discuss tho rejection by the. Registrar of Unions of certain rules which proposed to allow the New Zealand Shearers' Federation ,to use >heir funds for political purposes. Mr. T. E. TAYLOR (Christchurch North), who brought up tho matter, said that if tho matter were allowed to stand over it might lead to a great deal of friction between the sheep-owners \ and the shearers. The workers felt that ; they should not be called upon to fight ! a series.of appeals before the Court of 'Arbitration. There were, in his opinion, good grounds for their contention : that there should bo a colonial award \ governing the wool industry. One result of applications for awards in various districts would be to exhaust the funds of the workers. He had just received a letter from the secretary of' tho New Zealand Shearers' Federation in which it was stated that tho workers wanted a universal award because—(l) the conditions under which they worked . were practically the same all over tho . ! Dominion; (2) the same workers did the work in different districts; (3) the . sheep-owners were federated, although not registered; (4) tho conditions applying to sheen-owners in the different districts were identical; (5) the Shearers' Federation represented workers in all parts of tho Dominion; and (6) they were willing to have the same condi- \ tions applied to all districts. Mr. Taylor went on to say that the shearers were willing to accept the Wellington partial agreement with a few slight i amendments. They would, howi , ever,- insist . upon thv rate 'j being fixed at 20s. per hundred. ; It was quite clear that it was tho inf. tention of some • shipowners' unions !' to try to force the shearers into tho !"■ .Arbitration Court in tlio district in ! which the lowest rate per hundred was •' in force. Afterwards, if the owners got j. tti award embracing tho lowest rate.

it would use it as an argument why tho rate for all other portions of the Dominion should bo fixed at the same rate. Ho would like the Minister for Labour to tell the House whether ho bad gone fully into the matter, and whether he intended at an early date to take steps to obviate any trcublo on the subject. ~ . .

All Unions Discuss Politics. Mi. ARNOLD (Dunedih Central) said that tho Court of Arbitration had power to make Dominion awards. The question, therefore, was'riot" as to the power of tho Court, but as to whether rules of the kind in question should bo registrable. There was'not a trade union which did not now discuss political matters at their meetings. It was well known that unions in New Zoalaiid were using their funds for political purposes. He trusted that the New Zealand Act would bo so amended as to provido for tho registration of such rules. , Mr. BUICK (Palmerston North) said that ho had been in tho habit of paying 2os. per hundred, but as a stud breeder he wanted his sheep well shorn.,Mr. HOGG (Masterton) strongly favoured a uniform rate and uniform conditions of employment for tho wholo of the Dominion.

Effect'of Rise in Wool Last Year. Mr. ELL (Christchurch Soutli) declared that he could-not sec why sheepowners objected tea universal award. Mr.- MASSBY: Are you quite suro they are raising any objection ? Sir. ELL:'It would appear so. Mr. WITTY (Riccarton) declared that 20s. per 100 was little enough for shearing sneep, when it was remembered that the shearers did not as a rule have very good accommodation. Mr. M'LAREN (Wellington East) said that workers wore dissatisfied because they wore being trifled with at present. They were allowed to register but had very little power to settle disputes with the employers. As regards shearing, ho believed that a majority .of the farmers would favour a universal award. It bad been said that colonial awards could be got under the present Act, but they could not.do so except at a groat deal of trouble. It had to be remembered that the shearers had come to a determination that they would' not accept engagements next season if the matter were not settled in a reasonable manner v and from what ho lniew of them he felt sure that that would be tho case.

Strong Advocate for Uniform Awards. Mr. WRIGHT (Wellington South)'endorsed Mr. Taylor's remarks that 20s. was a fair price. He also favoured colonial awards—it was a farce tohave provincial' awards. As the conditions were the same,, the one rate of wages should be fixed. Instancing the typographical award, he said it was not fair for a lower rate to be stipulated in regard to .country-firms, .for. they- entered 'into competition with tile'city firms. Mr. DILLON ■ (Hawke's ■ Bay) said that "90 per cent." of/the: owners in .Hawke's Bay were agreeable'to pay 20s. per'hundred. ■"< '■'" • ■•■ "': Mr. BUCHANAN, (Wairarapa) declared that the conditions .were not simi- ; lar throughout the. Dominion. H was well-known that shearers, could afford 'to work at a slightly cheaper rate for largo, owners,, because they 'could get in'oro consistent /-work) -.better .aecommo-. dation,etc., on'the larger properties. He had noticed that the .shearers had 'stated that they'would have nothing to 'with; arbitration.' : Tho shearers jbhoui'd'at orice 'stiy whether, they were "willing"'to have, the matter settled by" arbitration. It would be seen that the shearers Wanted shed-hands brought nnde'rtho proposed award, but this suggestion worild not be'- generally favoured in New Zealqnd. Mr. RUSSELL (Avon) considered that a colonial award might apply ,to the wool industry better than to any other industry, because in it there was no competition.

Do the Workers Cet Fair Play? Mr. DAVEY (Christchurch East) agreed with Mr. Buchanan that it ;was regrettable-that the shearers were not willing to have the submitted 'to arbitration.' The Act was brought into force in order-to see that the rates of wages should always be fair. Mr. M'LAREN: But the workers don't get fair. play. Mr. ERASER (Wakatipu) said that if there were a. legislative award for one industry thero would have to bo similar awards in other industries, and this would mean death to the-Arbitra-tion Act. Mr. T. E. TAYLOR (Christclrurch North), by way of personal explana-, tion, said that all ho had advocated was thai the Court of Arbitration should be allowed to make awards embracing the- whole Dominion. ■ Mr. Eraser: I misunderstood you. The Hon. J. A. MILLAR (Minister for Labour) said that there' was no power to give the Shearers' Union what they wanted. It was desired by the shearers that they wanted to register one Shearers' Union for New Zealand, i and to get one- -universal award. Mr. M'Laren: Which they, are prevented from doing.

Who Opposed Colonial Awards? Mr. Millar: You say that you represent the workers. Well, let me tell you that it was tho workers who opposed colonial awards. Mr. M'Laren: That is not so. Mr. Millar: Tho argument which they used was.that if colonial awards wore allowed they might bo initiated in districts where there are tho lowest rates. .Mr. M'Laren: That is a different matter. Mr. Millar: They also said that unless a majority of the workers were bound by an award they would not accept a colonial award. Continuing, Mr.'Millar said it was wrong to imagino that if colonial awards were the custom it would save expense so far as the Court of Arbitration was concerned. If a colonial award was to be made, the Court would havo to-sit in the various centres as now. It was undoubtedly a very complicated matter, and the more-one went into it the more complex it appeared to get. He would admit that the same arguments wlu'ch applied to other industries might not apply to tho shearing trade. Mr. Taylor: It might bo possible for federated trades to get colonial awards. Mr. Millar: But that is possible now. The Minister (resuming) said that if tho owners and tho shearers agreed as to the rate which should apply for the whole of tho Dominion they could easily have a colonial award made. It would not cost one penny piece if the parties could be brought together. For himself he had always tried to see that fair conditions wero secured. In regard to a statoment nuulo by Mr. Wright, he would say that small country printing offices could not afford to pay the same rates of wages as the big city offices. Mr. Wright: Yes, they could. Object of Unionism. Mr. Millar said that Mr. M'Laren well knew that Im had applications from unions within the past- two months to havo a district divided so that separate conditions might bo obtained. He (the speaker) had always held that one strong union was worth half a dozen weak unions. With regard to. the right of unions to uso their funds for political purposes, ho admitted that it had been dono, but not with legislative sanction. The ob-

jeet of unionism was to secure collective bargaining. Seeing that unions included men of all shades of political opinion, was it right to force every member' of a union to contribute towards a fund for a political purpose whether he agreed with it or not? Under tho decision at Homo unions could not uso their funds for such a purpose. Sir. M'Laren: But our unions are registered under another Act. Mr. Millar: We aro governed by tho English Act where we have no specific law. Mr. Millar (resuming) said that ho did not intend to introduco a clause giving unions power to apply their funds in that way. Before he could agree to such a course ballots would havo to bo taken, and he would have to got tho opinion of every union in New Zealand on tho subject. He would liko to ask members if it were worth while for tho Houso to try and improve an Act.which' somo said • was obsolete, and of which the workers would not take advantage. (Hear, hears.) Ho wanted to know the position. Mr. Taylor: It is tho unions' funds, why not let them uso them as thoy like? . ' Not Favourable to the Proposal. Mr. Millar: They can't do it legally. There is a difference of opinion among tho workers. Why should men be asked to support a political view, of which they don't approve? Mr. M'Laren: That is not the point. Mr. Millar: Well, the Act will ba brought down, and members will have an' opportunity of moving such amendments as they think will tend to improve it; but, personally, I don't intend to bring down the amendment which somo members have suggested.

ADDRESS»JN»REPLY. CONTINUATION OF THE DEBATE. The debate on the Address-in-Reply was continued in tho evening. Mr. HOGG (Mastei'ton) condemned the attempt of an "unscrupulous section" to give Crown tenants uic freehold, in his district, very few tenants clamoured for tne freehold. Tho tenants had entered into a compact which, if they were honest, they would not want to break, especially when the bargain was such a good one in their favour. The chief aim of the Government should be to assist the landless. Ministers had ,let the cat out of tho bag in regard to Native land. They had stated that since the\King Country was first dealt with a few years ago, and since important Native laml legislation was passed by tho present Parliament, nearly the whole of the Native lands of any value whatever had slipped through the lingers of the Native Department. All that was left was a limited area of comparatively worthless country. Mr. Hogg also dealt with questions of capital and labour, suggesting, incidentally, that a right-to-work Bill should ho introduced. Mr. FORBES (Hurunui) urged the prime necessity of getting settlers on to the land. The question of tenure was, he thought, of less importance.

Mr. CLARK (Chalmers) urged that if the borrowing policy was a good thing, more money should be borrowed to put people on the land. The Government . should abolish bookmakers altogether. The 1 totalisator tax might be increased to provide funds for (defence. An appeal board for mental hospital attendants was urged by Mr. Clark. The Government should consider very carefully, before raising the age for compulsory service to 26 years. It would bo better to make everybody go to drill.

Mr. A. M. MYERS, the new member for Aueklaud'- East, . was encouraged with a hearty round of applause when he roso to niako his maiden speech. Ho said he hoped that the Government would definitely settle the question of land tenure, and that tho endowments already set aside • for education would remain inalienable;, but pioneers who were, carving out homes for themselves in the hackblocks should have the optional' tenure. Ho hoped that the Local Government Bill would not contain a policy of centralisation, but that.there was need for a Bill was shown by the fact that of 546 local bodies about onethird had a revenue of less than £500 d year, and spent from 17 to 25 per cent, in working expenses. An important matter not touched upon in tho Speech' was that of afforestation. He gave the Government credit for doing useful work in this respect, but he thought an even bolder policy might well be followed. Rural colleges should be established, to facilitate the application of. improved methods in agriculture. A small farm of 300 or 400 acres should he set aside in the Waikato for experiments in beet-growing, with a view to establishing that industry, which would save hundreds of thousands to consumers. Mr. Myers also dofonded Auckland members from the charge of parochialism, urging the necessity for safeguarding the interests of the North Island, which was advancing much more rapidly than tho South. The House adjourned at 10.45 p.m.