“I’ll -Salt You Up”

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 454, 8 September 1928, Page 13

“I’ll -Salt You Up”

1 ' ‘ !kh n c nt ;itv Pleasantries Hard Words on Mines Report ITHE SUN’S Parliamentary Reporter) JTNEXPECTED product™, by™ iSJ U afternoon oi a statement dealing with a recent dispute at the Cascade mine, near Burnett’s face, Westport aroused the anger of the Leader of the Opposition, and led to the exchange oi some hard words. ne ~T ^U ™ S the discussion, which occupied almost the whole of the at, einoon and was at times heated, Mr. V H Potter S a he C perlt 0 ed r i r i and i f nformed that he would be “named” it he persisted in his interjections.

at the outset the Prime Minister " asked if he could make a statement along "with the mines report Mr Holland had no objection, but when he saw what the statement was he made strong protest, stating that it was obviously an inspired statement The Speaker intervened, informing Mr. Coates that if he was making “ speech preparatory to presenting the mines report, he could not read from the [statement; but that he could of course, present the statement in the usual way as a Ministerial statement This Mr. Coates did. The Prime Minister said that it was quite clear that the Cascade Company was within its rights in working men under the co-operative principle. The Miners’ Union took exception to the company exercising such right, a strike took place, and a demonstration was made against cooperative workers in a motor-car. Someone suggested the workers should be tarred and feathered and the car thrown over a bank. A piece of tin. by 12in. timber was thrown at the car. It was clear members of the Monaghan party could not be deemed to be trlbuters. A friendly settlement had since been arrived at. Under this a section of the mine would be worked under the co-operative system, and it was hoped it would be extended to other mines. It was hoped intimidation would not be practised against co-operative workers, but If it was found steps were being taken to intimidate men, and if the Government was approached to terminate it, it would be the bounden duty of the Government to see that co-operative parties were permitted to enjoy that measure of liberty of action to which everybody had an established right. MR. HOLLAND’S PROTEST The Leader of the Opposition, Mr. H. E. Holland, said he regretted very much that the Prime Minister had presented to the House a mutilated statement regarding the trouble. His action could have no motive except to stir up trouble on the coalfields. The dispute had been amicably settled, and it should have been allowed to stay at that. The Prime Minister gave the House the impression that the dispute was settled on the basis of the tribute system, whereas the men had gone back on the co-operative system, as opposed to the tribute system, which was objected to by the workers in every branch of unionism, because it always resulted in sweating. Mr. Holland said common courtesy demanded that the Prime Minister should have given him a copy of his statement. Then he would have been able to give the Prime Minister a complete answer that afternoon. It was

an ex parte statement, and there could be no adequate debate on the subject because a surprise had been sprung on the bouse. The dispute had been amicably settled and there was no excuse for reviving it. Unionists all over the world bad objected to work under the tribute system. Mr. V. H. Potter (Roskill): It is the best system in the world. Mr. Holland: The honourable gentleman knows nothing about it. Mr. Potter: Oh, yes I do. The Speaker: Order! Mr. Holland: The honourable gentleman has never worked under trade union conditions. Mr. Potter: No. The Speaker: I am sorry to have to warn the bon. member that I wall have to name him if be persists in making disorderly interjections when he has been called to order. “PRECIPITATING TROUBLE ” Mr. Holland said the miners had used conciliatory methods, together with the Alliance. The Prime Minister wished to precipitate industrial trouble. Mr. Potter: Rot! Mr. Coates: Oh, nonsense! Mr. Holland said the Prime Minister had covered up some of the facts and sought to create the impression that violence was used. The Prime Minister interjected that the statement was compiled from reports of mine inspectors. IVIr. Holland said he did not care where the statement came from. The Prime Minister did not go to the miners* unions for his information. Mr. Holland described the Prime Minister’s statement as an unfair and inaccurate concoction, a red herring drawn across the trail for the purpose of diverting attention from the real position on the coalfields. Mr. Potter stated that apparently the Leader of the Opposition thought he was the only one in the House who knew anything about mining. He offered to prove that he held' more mining tickets than all the Labour Party put together. “I am speaking as a practical miner, not as an underground navvy,” said Mr. Potter, advocating the institution of straight-out contract systems. Mr. W. E. Parry, after referring to the unexpectedness of the Prime Minister’s statement on a question that had been settled weeks before, said the Prime Minister had not shown very good form. Mr. H. T. Armstrong said the Prime Minister had tried to convey the impression that the Labour Party had been responsible for the dispute. Mr. Coates: Does the cap fit? Mr. Armstrong: You tried t) make it fit. Bankrupt of policy, you tried to make political capital out of this

dispute. Tell us who wrote your speech. Mr. Speaker: Order! Order! Mr. Coates: Don’t you like it? Mr. Armstrong: I like the part that’s true. Mr. Holland: And that is not too much. Mr. Armstrong was instructed by the Speaker to withdraw his remark, and did so. Mr. Coates: You give me half an hour, and I’ll salt you up. Mr. Armstrong: You would make a hopeless member unless someone wrote your speeches for you. Mr. Speaker: Order, Order! THE STORM BREAKS The storm broke when, after Mr. H. T. Armstrong and Mr. P. Fraser had spoken, the Prime Minister rose to reply. Mr. Coates invited Mr. Fraser to show him in what way the arrangement under which the men were now working differed from the original arrangement. Mr. Holland: I can tell you in two words. Mr. Coates: You don’t know. The hon. gentleman got up and stormed and yelled and floundered, and made himself a bag of hot air. Mr. Holland: How ridiculous. Mr. Coates (amid chorus of interjections) : And finally he was glad to get on to something he knew something about. He added that the Government had been asked by numerous groups of co-operative miners to define the Government’s attitude. Mr. Fraser: What rubbish. Mr. Coates: What rubbish, you say. I can tell you there has been a strong demand for this statement. Mr. Holland: Name one co-operative party. Mr. Coates, amid considerable uproar, said he gave all credit to Mr. Semple for ais efforts. The point was, however, that co-operative parties wanted to know whether they were to be dominated or whether they could go ahead. There was no difference between past and present arrangements in the case in dispute. Mr. Holland: That is not correct. The’ announcement of the adjournment closed an exceedingly heated interlude.