I.—9a.

64

D. MCLAREN.

24. Would you rather reconstruct than replace them ?—Yes, I would rather reconstruct them than replace them with the Industrial Councils. Section 5 deals with the Industrial Councils. I would point out that the one thing connected with this arbitration law which organized labour can never afford to give up is the absolute independence of their representatives in adjudication. It was under the guarantee of this that the workers' unions first registered under the Act, and 1 believe if that element is weakened or destroyed it will mean a breakdown in the Act itself. I submit that there are three principles in this arbitration law which must be maintained: The first is the independence of our representatives in adjudication; the second is reasonable continuity in methods and principles adopted by those exercising the functions of adjudication; and the third, general and specialised knowledge and insight in connection with industrial affairs. We oppose the Industrial Councils proposal because it stands only for the third principle herein named, and not even that in its entirety, as the selection of adjudicators from the industry concerned in the dispute is a reliance principally on specialised knowledge, and even there general knowledge of industrial affairs and capacity of construction may be wholly overlooked. In this connection I would point out that the workers in this district, for instance, believe that the accumulated knowledge which a man like Mr. A. H. Cooper, a member of the present Board, has acquired is of verygreat value to them. Specialised knowledge is not always of the value which it is taken to have. As an illustration I would point out that when Mr. W. M. Hughes, M.H.R. of the Australian Commonwealth, was sent Home to the Marine Conference recently, there was a bit of an outcry against him being sent on the ground that he was not a fully qualified seaman. Yet when he returned it was recognised that his general capacity and high constructive ability was of more value than the mere specialised knowledge of some of the other representatives. The big majority of the unions in this country are small unions. Going through the last return of the Department —I might say that I had a complete return, but have mislaid it—l made out that there were over 150 unions which had a membership of 100 and under —that is, out of a total number of 274 workers' unions. The 150-odd I speak of would not include branch unions, but unions proper. 25. Hon. Mr. Millar.] Did you exempt the Railway servants? —Yes. Coming back to the value of general knowledge and acquired capacity from the hearing of many cases, I would like to point out that this is of special value to the workers. It is even of more value to the workers than it is to the employers, for this reason : that the employers have more funds at their disposal. They have more of the means of purchasing assistance as they require it. They can get the assistance of trained minds, legal minds, and others more easily than the workers can. Therefore, although the setting-up of these Industrial Councils may please a few of the unions through them thinking that they are going to entirely manage their own affairs, we feel certain that they will come to recognise that they have lost a great deal through the striking-out of the permanent element of the Conciliation Boards. Section 27 :We think that, if the right of appeal on fines is allowed, the purpose for which the application to Magistrates for enforcements is provided will be destroyed. The unions want this law simplified ; they do not want it made more and more complicated, because that simply means selling the workers. Continued appeals and litigation mean the victory all the time for the men with the long purse. 26. The Chairman.] You have not overlooked the fact that the award will be in force all the time? —That is so; but, the object of allowing the Magistrate to enforce the award seems to be to cut away by allowing appeals. Section 28 : This, I submit, allows, according to the judgment of the Appeal Court, for imprisonment in the case of non-payment of fines. The Minister said he never wishes to see a man imprisoned, and I accept his assurance; but I think that is a good reason why this sword should not hang over the heads of the workers continually. Section 29 is practically on the lines of section 101 of the existing Act, only that the word " debt," as it exists in section 101 of the Act, is replaced by the word "fine." Whether that has any relation, or whether it is for the purpose of making it clearer that the fine shall not be collected in the way of a civil debt, but shall be regarded as a penalty enforceable finally by writ of attachment, I cannot say. The wording of the whole section is too deep for my mind, and I should require something of a legal training to be more sure of it. Section 30: The proposal for attachment of wages in payment of a fine we oppose very strongly. The whole trend of democratic legislation has been for the last fifty years in the direction of freeing wages from anything of this nature. 27. Can you give us" any suggestion as to how penalties shall be enforced if wages are exempted?—l hold that the penalties should be enforced as a civil debt. The penalties put upon employers are never likely, in my judgment, to be enforced in any other way than as a civil debt, The return given in the House by the Hon. Mr. Millar in reference to the outstanding liabilities on the part of certain employers was to the effect that there were 2 \ per cent, of those who had been fined whose fines were not yet paid. This will, I take it, be collected in no other way than as a civil debt, and I never want to" see them forced on the employees in any other way. Sir, on this question'of fines I think we are forgetting that this Act, to be of value, requires to induce confidence. When we have to depend upon the coercive force of a fine or imprisonment, then will come the time when the Act itself'is weakening, and I submit that then comes the time when the Legislature should give its highest wisdom to improving the machinery of this industrial law so as to inspire the confidence of all once again. There has been a great deal said about the slaughtermen's strike, but I submit, sir, with all respect, that the slaughtermen's strike was due to the laxity of the Legislature in failing to push on the amendment to the Act which would do away with the congestion and delay which caused so much bitterness right throughout the country. I would like to point out that iii this section 30 there is no suggestion that a worker, or a union of workers, should ever act as agents in collecting fines imposed on employers. We do not want such a thing : we do not want to take the position of a bailiff or debt-collector .in that way, but we certainly strongly object to the employers having any such power over us. Section 33: This refers to section 152 of the amending Act of 1905. That is the anti-strike-and-lockout section. I would