The Sun 42 Wyndham Street, Auckland, N.Z. MONDAY, OCTOBER 31, 1927. THE FATE OF A CRUDE BILL

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 189, 31 October 1927, Page 8

The Sun 42 Wyndham Street, Auckland, N.Z. MONDAY, OCTOBER 31, 1927. THE FATE OF A CRUDE BILL

IF the fate of the Government’s unpopular Bill for the reconstruction of the Arbitration Court on experimental lines be still uncertain, the Minister of Labour should “mak siecar” and place the raw measure in cold storage for at least a year. Neither representative employers nor any of the innumerable industrial unions want it, and all have condemned it as a provocative thing almost entirely devoid of merit. As a rule even a bad piece of legislation will gam some support from a few simple people, but this latest legislative proposal of the Reform Government lias not won approval from halt-a-dozen voices throughout the whole country. Such a miserable reception should convince the sponsors of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act Amendment Bill that it would be discreet political wisdom to store'it away for a long time. It pleased the Hon. G. J. Anderson to score off a deputation of labour organisations, representing some ninety thousand workers, that waited on the Prime Minister and him at Wellington on Saturday for the purpose of urging the withdrawal of the Bill. The Minister twitted both the unions and the employers for having changed their front regarding the Arbitration Court, and reminded the deputation that he was inundated about eighteen months ago with requests from almost every union m New Zealand for the Court’s abolition. No one will begrudge Mr. Anderson liis momentary laugh at employers and workers, but what the country wants is the rare pleasure of seeing the Minister and the Government laugh with the representatives of industry because of mutual delight over legislation designed on a basis that would make assured a fiiie record of industrial peace, together with confident industrial progress. This the amending Bill does not provide. It may be too harsh to say, as the deputation said bluntly on Saturday, that the Bill does not possess a single redeeming feature, but it cannot be argued with any hope of convincing anyone that it possesses features for redeeming the former and even the present prestig< of the Arbitration Court. By far the most destructive criticism of the useless proposal was that thrown at it by the Advisory Board of the New Zealand Employers’ Federation. That body was neither vehement nor partisan. It quietly condemned the Bill on four counts, and left the Government without a case. It particularly emphasised the danger from irresponsible arbitrators. Such danger, it may be added, is not the only menace. There should be no haste at all on the question of improving or seeking to improve the law concerning industrial conciliation and arbitration. Both sides in industry have made it clear that they now realise the worth of the Arbitration Court, despite its faults of service through the limitations imposed upon it hv Parliament. What is wanted first is not so much further tinkering * with the Act as more co-operation between employers and workers, between Capital and Labour, for making the best possible use of the existing industrial law. The Minister should lose his Bill and give serious thought to securing a representative conference, of employers’ and workers’ representatives and economists, for the purpose of discussing practicable ways and means for improving the service of the Arbitration Court. NO “STAGNATION” ALL that, Mr. ,T. W. Shackelford, chairman of the Amalgamation Committee, sees in Mount Roskill’s rejection of incorporation with the city is “stagnation.” Surely this is pessimism doubly deep; a faint heart where a brave one is needed! There is no reason why Mount Roskill, deliberately isolated by the vote of its ratepayers, should not make the most of its isolation. Not “Stagnation”—“Forward!” should be the cry. The majority against amalgamation with the city was a small one, and there is reason to believe that selfish motives on the part of people nearest the city and well served in respect to transport turned the scale against those farther removed and with more to hope for in the event of becoming part of Greater Auckland. The verdict js not one which fixes the district’s destiny for ever. It is for those who advocate amalgamation to continue tlieir advocacy, and to show by applying themselves to the job in hand that they have faith in their district and are able, by combined effort, to govern it well, even as a separate entity. If they can do that, and still prove that there can be even better government as part of the city, they will have pointed the way to progress. But talk of “stagnation” in respect to such a fine district as Mount Roskill is very poor talk indeed. CLEARING THE FERRY-WAY ‘_y THE congestion of shipping which takes place during the rush hours of the ferry service is seriously concerning the harbourmaster, who considers the present conditions to be dangerous. Captain Sergeant has, therefore, recommended the Harbour Board to pass a by-law prohibiting all vessels other than ferries and launches navigating the basin bounded by Queen’s and Prince’s wharves between the hours of 7.45 a.m. and 8.80 a.m., and 4.45 p.m. and 5.80 p.m.. on week-days, and between 7.15 a.m. and 8.30 a.m., and noon and 12.30 p.m. on Saturdays. It is a perfectly reasonable suggestion, and one that should not meet with opposition. A cargo-boat should not be permitted to hold up local traffic—and perhaps imperil the lives of hundreds of passengers —at times when crowds of workers are being conveyed to and from the city. This traffic has the first claim on the fairway, and there is no question of it in other countries, where marine legislation provides for this right. The harbourmaster is to be congratulated in studying the convenience and safety of the public by recommending the framing of such a by-law as this.