PROTEST AGAINST NON-RATIFICATION OF 48-HOUR PACT

Manawatu Times, Volume LIII, Issue 6545, 29 February 1928, Page 7

PROTEST AGAINST NON-RATIFICATION OF 48-HOUR PACT

Labour Opposition to Civil Estimates Vote OVERWHELMING DEFEAT OF MOTION . j [By Electric Cable-Copyright.] [Aus*. and N.Z. Cable Association.] (Received Tuesday, 5.5 p.m.) LONDON, Feb. 27. In the House of Commons in Committee on the Civil Estimates Mr T. Shaw (Labour) moved a reduction as a protest against Britain’s non-rati-fication of the Washington Eight Hours Convention, declaring that Britain’s failure to honor her bond had torpedoed the Convention. Mr H. B. Betterton, replying, said that the reason the Government had not ratified tho Convention despite the fact that 35 per cent of tho people in Britain worked only 48 hours per week was that existing industrial agreements affecting hundreds of thousands of British workers would be imperilled by ratification of Convention as it was at present drafted. If the Labourites really wanted to secure the position of workers throughout tho worlds they would support Britain’s effort to amend the Convention which was at present variously interpreted in different countries. Sir A. H. D. Ramsay Stcol-Mait-land, the Minister of Labour, ini closing the debate, said that there was never any obligation on tbo part of the Government to ratify the Convention so thaf there could not be any question of breach of faith. It was clear the Labour Party wished to ratify the Washington Convention as it now stood. Mr T. Shaw interrupting indignantly, denied this. Sir Ramsay Steel-Maitland: "Then I do not know where Mr Shaw stands. A 48-hour week would be illegal in many industries under any domestic legislation founded on the Washington Convention. If we pressed for revision I do not think there would be any fundamental difference between ourselves and France. The motion was defeated by 214 votes to 98, and tho vote was agreed to.