HOURS FOR SHOPS

Waikato Times, Volume 127, Issue 21226, 24 September 1940, Page 7

HOURS FOR SHOPS

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS MEASURES IN ABEYANCE MR C. A. WILKINSON’S FEARS (Special to Times) ELTHAM, Monday Clauses in the Amendment to the Shops and Offices Act which were before the last session of Parliament and were withdrawn upon strong objection from a considerable section of the House, were the subject of a statement by Mr C. A. Wilkinson, M.P., today. The clauses referred particularly to the closing hours and half-holidays in shops. “When being discussed in the House, the amendment was strongly condemned by the Opposition, and Mr F. W. Schramm, member for Auckland East, and the Hon. W. E. Barnard, member for Napier, also spoke in opposition to the legislation as it then stood,” said Mr Wilkinson. “The objection to the proposed amendment was so strong that the Government, after many hours of debate, withdrew the clause, but the Prime Minister stated, and this has since been confirmed by the press, that a Shops and Offices Bill will be introduced at a later date, and if agreed to by the Government, it would not again be withdrawn, but would go through and become lav/. Allegedly Innocuous “The Hon. P. Webb, Minister of Labour on September 4 again referred to the bill and endeavoured to infer that it was innocuous and had been asked for by the Master Grocers’ Association and the Shop Assistants’ Federation in a joint deputation in 1938. “During the debate I voiced the opinion, which was confirmed by others, that the business community generally did not know a single thing about the proposal, that it had not been asked for by business organisations, and in view of the far-reaching nature of the legislation, the bill should be held over. It now remains for those concerned—the business community, business organisations, and the farming community—to consider the matter. “I would like to point out that in effect, if this legislation becomes law the right to determine the day of the weekly half-holiday, the opening and closing hours for shops, also the right to continue the late shopping night, as well as Saturday morning trading, would all be determined by a Judge of the Arbitration Court. Unions are always active before Arbitration Courts, and no doubt would muster up a fairly good case for these restrictions. Business and farming organisations, not being so much alive to the position, would probably be at a disadvantage, and the public interest might easily be sacrificed. Powers of Magistrate “It is true that the decision of an Arbitration Court Judge, under the proposed legislation, could be overridden on appeal before a magistrate, but this kind of thing means money, time and trouble, whereas if the law remains as it is at present, nothing of this kind would be necessary. In any case it seems strange that a magistrate could reverse the decision of a Supreme Court Judge—this point is worth noting. The real drive in connection with this bill in my opinion is:— “(1) To close the shops permanently on Saturday mornings, which would be a great inconvenience to the general public and the farming community, as well as serious loss to business people. “(2) To eventually do away with late shopping night, which would be highly detrimental to all, including those workers whose unions may be pressing for the legislation. “(3) To make the weekly halfholiday universal on Saturdays. (This is optional at present.)”