Wairarapa Times-Age FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1942. STRIKE AND STATE CONTROL.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 25 September 1942, Page 2

Wairarapa Times-Age FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1942. STRIKE AND STATE CONTROL.

announcement by the Minister of Mines (Mr Webb), reported yesterday, that all the Waikato coal mines are to be brought under State control for the duration of the war, but that this does not mean nationalisation of the mines, is a staggering sequel to what has gone before in the Waikato mining strike. Mr Webb said he could state definitely that

the decision had not been made at the demand of the miners. In fact, regulations providing for State control of the coal mines had been drafted a week before the men raised the question and were held ready for enactment in the last resort if the strike were prolonged.

The fact remains, however, that the announcement of the Government decision follows closely on a, report that the miners on strike in the Waikato had decided by a. substantial majority to return to work on the understanding that the Government take over the mines. Looking' at the actual course of events, and bearing in mind also that the normal operation of the law '< appears to have been suspended where the Waikato strikers are concerned, unprejudiced people may be pardoned for wondering whether the decision now reached to establish State control does not mean that the mines and the State will be controlled by the miners.

It has been stated by the Minister of Armed Forces and War Co-ordination (Mr Coates) that in his personal belief there is a distinct difference between socialisation and the form of control it is proposed to establish over the Waikato mines. It is common knowledge, he added, that when a vital industry is subjected to interference in war time because of the failure of those engaged in it to accept their obligations as citizens, the Government has a duty to intervene.

The statement last quoted is beyond dispute, but has it any bearing on the position that has arisen at the Waikato coal mines? It is or appears to be common ground that the dispute which led to the strike was on a matter of comparatively trivial detail. A member of the Wellington Harbour Board (Mr J.. 0. Johnson) stated at a meeting of that body on Wednesday evening that “there was only £l6 in issue.” In fairness it must be added that Mr Johnson also said that both sides apparently considered there was a principle at stake. Machinery exists, however, for the settlement of disputes of this nature and the Waikato miners were advised and strongly urged by the national executive of their organisation, and by that of the Federation of Labour, to resume work and make use of this machinery by referring their dispute to the national disputes committee.

Can it be said in these circumstances that any approach has been made to the conditions instanced by Mr Coates? No evidence has been offered that the organisation of the industry has broken down. What has happened is that one party in the industry—the miners—Jias refused to have a small-scale dispute settled by means of the machinery provided for that purpose, and that the Government has acquiesced in that refusal, incidentally denying any voice in the matter to the other party in the industry—the companies owning the Waikato mines. Mr Webb is reported to have stated that the consent of the companies did not come into the matter, because the Government had resolved that, in the interests of New Zealand’s war effort, the change would have to take place. On the facts in sight, the national war effort has been hindered and threatened, in this instance, only by a body of miners adopting a course of action condemned by their own national organisation and declared by the executive of the Federation of Labour to be contrary to the policy of the trade union movement. In spite of what has been said by Mr Webb and Mr Coates, the decision reached by the Government is distinctly suggestive of subservience to these miners.