PREMIER’S DEFENCE

Evening Star, Issue 24326, 15 October 1942, Page 4

PREMIER’S DEFENCE

An amendment was moved by the Prime Minister, Mr Fraser, in the following terms: —“ This House pledges anew its united and wholehearted support for the Government and the War Cabinet in the conduct of the war effort, and expresses its determination, as representatives of all the people in the Dominion, to prosecute that war effort with singleness of purpose and undiminised energy until victory for the cause of democracy and freedom is won.” In moving that amendment Mr Fraser said he felt certain that the opinion of the House would be more thoroughly represented and the wishes and hearts of the people more thoroughly expressed by their representatives. As he listened to Mr Holland he wondered if he was in the New Zealand House of Representatives or' with the Japanese only a few hundred miles away. Ho had wondered also what had been the directing keynote of the honourable gentleman’s utterances, and the inspiration of his actions, but that had been revealed to him by what Mr Holland 'had said. In discussing' a certain document, Mr Holland had said that the mineowners had been x'obbed of their mines. The honourable gentleman’s heart bled for the mineowners because for the time being they wore sharing control, instead of having absolute control. That was not robbing them of the mines. The mines were theirs, and would be theirs at the end of, the war; their property and they would be handed back without any capital loss to them. The term “ rob ” was a misconception of the actual position. It was wrong, according to Mr Holland, to control the mines, but it was not wrong to control lives and take young njen and send them out to fight and die for us. To talk about robbery under such circumstances was to place the user of the term out of court. Every step was taken, continued the Prime Minister, to safeguard the capital and profits of the owners. It was contended that coal was of secondary importance to enforcing the law. Mr Bodkin: Was not the real issue who should govern in this country ? The Prime Minister suggested that Mr Bodkin could discuss that with his leader. He had been informed by the chairman of the New Zealand Cq-opera-tive Dairy Company that if the strike continued it would mean the collapse of the dairy industry within a few days. The Leader of the Opposition had said he suggested an alternative to the imprisonment* of the 180 miners, and this was to let the majority go and imprison the ringleaders. This was not enforcing the law regardless of consequences, so that the principle for which Mr Holland said he stood went into the limbo. Mr Fraser agreed that the Leader of the Opposition tackled financial questions earnestly and successfully, and it was no action of the speaker which prevented him from continuing that service. His action in leaving the Administration was thus shown to be worse than ever. Ordinary methods of finance in war time were impossible, for after the entry of Japan into the war the country had to undertake a gigantic programme of building and other requirements. A system had to be adopted which was open to criticism normally—that of a master schedule instead of tenders, and it would he strange if in the expenditure of millions everyone was efficient and above reproachbut the War Cabinet took steps to control expenditure and secure full details of what was proposed, and tho Treasury would not allow the diversion of expenditure to other purposes without the issue of new authority from, the War Cabinet. SMASHED. The Prime Minister reminded the House that he had been prepared to agree to a National Government, but there could be no basis for this unless one was sure of loyal co-operation. He had hoped that the success of the War Administration would lead to a National Government, though there were grave doubts among members of his own party, but the War Administration was smashed, and he considered that the action of those who resigned showed lack of appreciation of the issues at stake. Turning to the origin of the proposal for State control or the mines, the Prime Minister explained that immediately he returned from the. United States the Minister of Mines raised the question with him. In addition he un* derstood that Mr Coates had discussed it with coal owners, who said they did not like it, but they were reasonable. He understood that the matter had been discussed by the members of the War Cabinet. Unfortunately it was mentioned at the meeting in' Huntly, but if anybody claimed that the idea originated with the minors or that they were offered it as a bribe they were incorrect. Referring to the seamen’s strike in 1934. the Prime Minister said that if the Government in that year was justified (and he believed it was justified) in winning industrial peace for the country, then the present Government was justified a thousand times in what it had done to get peace and coal in the Waikato. But the present Government did not go so far as the 1934 Government, because instead of remitting the sentences it had merely suspended them, and they could hud would be made to operate if the conditions were not observed Tiic Prime Minister said that the basis of unity in the country had been irretrievably destroyed bv Mr Holland’s action. He regretted" the strike and the attitude of the miners, and he greatly regretted the fact that Ministers had emulated the miners and, in effect, had struck because one of them could not get his own way. It w r as a had day’s work to split the unity that had been achieved. THE MEN MISLED. Mr Fraser said the miners had been misled by a few, and under that xnisleadership, the magistrate did not have a chance, although he did his best to avoid passing sentence. The outlook of the magistrate was the outlook of the Government and the majority of the members of the War Cabinet. It was the outlook also of the majority of the people of New Zealand. No member of the Opposition would get up and say he wanted to see 180 men sent to gaol. It would not have stopped at that. Another 800 or 1,000 men would have had to face the same charge. _ Mr Fraser said the decision was arrived at on Friday night and the men' were sentenced on Saturday. The Minister of Industrial Man Power. Mr McLagan, said he was associated closely witli the miners, and he would endeavour to get the men back. “ I thought it much better to get them back than to put them in gaol,” he continued. “ I take full responsibility for the step of asking that operation of the sentences be suspended until another effort was made to get the men to see reason." The Government had acted in a constitutional manner, and according to precedent well established in New Zealand and other countries. The men were not criminals. They were citizens who for the time being bad done something wrong, but who must be treated like ordinary human beings. Their families bad to be thought about. They had sons at the front fighting

alongside the sons of citizens and' memoers of the House. They did not want to outlaw a section of the people who were temporarily misled. They wanted to win them hack for a better effort. Mr Fraser said that when he arrived in Wellington on his return from Washington, he had consulted members of the War Cabinet, and brought down proposals.to the War Administration. The first proposal was that the men should resume work unconditionally and the dispute go to the Disputes Committee unconditionally. It was also proposed that the Waikato coal mines should be a controlled industry. There was no word said of nationalisation, but that control should be the period of the war, and that there should be uninterrupted work, the owner and the workers being safeguarded. A ballot was taken, the men went back to work, the dispute went to a Disputes Committee, and there had then been negotiations culminating in an agreement with the min© owners’ representatives. And the national organisation had agreed to every step in the control regulations, with the exception of one. Nationalist Voice: Under duress, Mr Fraser said the one point was the casting vote being given to the Minister ot j Mines, - but at some point it was necessary for some person to have the casting vote, and he thought the arrangement was going to be successful. Mr Holland had said that he could not see his way to agree to the proposals He felt he had to leave, but that was not a final leaving, because he sat for two or three days afterwards with the committee. He walked out when the vote was taken, to allow the decision to be unanimous. He said he was the odd man out. and had better leave. Mr Fraser said his reply was that he had no objection. Mr Holland had considered- that by walking out he was serving the best of the conn-'' try instead of remaining in and voting for his convictions. Mr Holland: That is not fair. Mr Fraser: If it is unfair. I will withdraw. Government Voices; It is time. Mr Fraser said if it was Mr Holland’s duty to allow others to come to a unanimous decision without his voice in dissent, everybody else voted in favour of the proposals. If there had been any better _ solution they would have voted for it. Mr Bodkin said he wired from Stratford to say he was opposed to the proposals. ELECTION ISSUE. The election issue was raised by Mr Doidge. Only recently, he said, when the War Administration was formed, the Prime Minister had given an assurance that the issue would never be shirked, and that if at any time the War Administration failed to work an appeal to the country was inevitable. ‘‘ I am one of those who contend,” said Mr Doidge, “ that an election would not interfere with the war effort.” In the Dominion there was discontent, unrest, and anxiety, and a sense of frustration. What else could bo expected, because on the Treasury benches there were a lot of tired old men. These were the men who were in charge of the war effort, the men who appeased when there arose, what they themselves had described as an effort to sabotage the war effort. They were surely riding on a tiger, and an; election would prove it. Referring to the Waikato strike, Mr Doidgo said that if the strike had lasted another 10 days there would have been a collapse of industry. While the Government’s policy of giving way had staved off the evil day, the miners would become bolder, and some day the Government would have to face up to a more severe issue and take drastic action. Mr Forbes: Never! Mr Doidge: Even a worm will turn. He added that the Government had been led by the nose by a group of Communists, and believed it should continue iu office for the duration of the war and one year longer. BETTER FEELING. The Minister of Mines declared that, while the action of the Waikato miners in striking and defying their organisation was a disgrace, there was now better feeling in that coalfield, and they were making' new records in production. He denied that State control was a condition of resuming work. The men resumed unconditionally, and the dispute was referred to the Disputes Committee. In facing the problem of a stoppage of the coal output, the Government had to be realists. Putting the miners into gaol was no solution, and when the Leader of the Opposition was asked for an alternative when he opposed State control, he suggested bringing in the military, which would certainly have led to chaos and civil war. The Waikato miners had agreed to contract trucking and to prevent further stop-work meetings, and he was sure they would make records i.n production. The Government’s action would solve the coal problem for the duration of the war.