The Daily News. SATURDAY, JULY 8, 1922. AN INDUSTRIAL PARLIAMENT.

Taranaki Daily News, 8 July 1922, Page 4

The Daily News. SATURDAY, JULY 8, 1922. AN INDUSTRIAL PARLIAMENT.

The prolonged state. of industrial differences and warfare has proved seriously detrimental throughout the world to the interests of the nations affected, and. if continued unchecked, will certainly exact a heavy price from all sections of society. Britain has suffered considerably from this evil, and now one of its sanest and soundest of Labor leaders (the Right Hon. Arthur Henderson, M.P.), has put forward a suggestion and scheme for the formation of a Parliament of Industry, which he considers would be a most fruitful method of promoting and cultivating improved relations between the two organised sections actively associated in productive industry. Dealing with possible objection to the question of production not being the concern of the workers, as they cannot afford to expedite their own enforced idleness only to improve the profits of their exploiters, Mr. i Henderson says:‘Tf we are to have a progressive development in industry in this country (Britain), if economic life is ever to ■be pervaded by a powerful social motive; if industry is eVer to be dominated by goodwill, publie spirit, and better human relationships, these must be the result of mutual understanding and a determination to bring industrial life and activity into harmony with modern human requirements. There must be a greater regard for al] the interests; the employers must have greater regard for the well-being of the employed, .and both employers and employed must remember how vitally the success or failure of industry affects the entire community.”

Even if such impressive sentiments are merely regarded as creating the right atmosphere in which it is possible to lay the foundations of industrial peace, they are none the less effective when viewed in relation to the suggested Parliament of Industry, which would provide industry as a whole with a mouthpiece as well as. an organisation through which it can express itself, both on the isolated affairs of a single industry, as well as on problems which affect the economic life of the nation as a whole. Obviously, if such a body is to be created, it is essential that it should come into existence as the result of the initiative of trade unions and employers’ organisations; also that it should be independent of the State, though the Government might reasonably be expected to provide a suitable place of meeting. There should be no difficulty in framing the regulations of membership: the more elastic they are made the better for the purpose. As to the duties of such a body, they would embrace all matters of general interest as regards industrial affairs on which a national policy is essential, and particularly the duty of mediation. At present labor organisations are legion, so that it is not surprising a move was made to create One Big Union. An Industrial Parliament would be of infinitely greater service, because both sides would be represented fairly and fully. Mr. Henderson does not expect such a body to perform miracles, its real object being to provide machinery for the discussion of common problems of vital importance, not only to those engaged in industry, but to the whole community. While such a Parliament might be of service in Britain, its counterpart in the Dominions could be a National Industrfai Conyf-il of jemployees jaad

employers. Legislation would be necessary to give the required powers for settling all differences and securing the observance of decrees. The principle is that industrial disputes and conditions should be the subject of settlement by those concerned—as a matter of equity and not as a question of law, while the object is to promote industrial peace .and. harmony, and so, as far as possible, eliminate direct action by making the Council the supreme arbiter. The proposed experiment appears to deserve careful consideration in the interests of the whole community.