4,( 7
.2UTRLIlA1 ,
PRIME MINISTER
FOR MEDIA SUNDAY, 16 MARCH, 1980
ELECTORATE TALK
Over the past weeks, many Australians have suffered unnecessarily
as a result of the blatant and selfish exercise of union power.
Such behaviour is repugnant to the majority of Australians.
We have come, as a nation, through difficult times. Now, our
inflation is down; our new international competitiveness
means that overseas buyers want more and more of our goods.
Billions of dollars of investment projects are about to go ahead
in Australia.
The most important result of all this activity is obvious.
Employment is up by overl30, O00 in the last year. And there are
prospects for future job opportunities. But there are selfish
sections in the community who, if their recent behaviour is
any indication, are prepared to sacrifice these gains by the
abuse of union power and by adopting attitudes of self-interest.
As has been too often the case in the past, this unthinking,
militant behaviour has been supported or condoned in areas
it should have been, from the outset, resisted, rejected
' adcondemned.
Let me be specific. New South Wales in particular almost ground to
a halt last week as a result of a strike by petrol tanker drivers,
members of the Transport Workers'Union. This dispute was not
about wages or conditions; not about a fight between unions;
or between Federal and State Branches of a union; it was a
fight within a union.
It centred around an Australian citizen, Mr. Leon Laidely, not
trying to deny anyone business, not trying to say a non-unionist
should do his work, not saying another union should do the work;
but merely saying that one of his own employees, a member of
the Transport Workers' Union should perform the job.
The Union wanted the right to say who would perform the job.
It was to prevent-this kind of occurence that the Government
introduced Section 45D into the Trade Practices Act. Simply,
is designed to stop organisations unions or companies
from hindering or preventing commercial dealings between a
third party and the boycotted company.
That Section enabled Mr. Laidely to obtain an injunction against
the Union because it was refusing to allow some of its members
to deliver supplies to Mr. Laidely. / 2
-2
As Mr. Street said on Friday, while welcoming the cessation
of the dispute, the Government views with real concern the
arrangements under which the settlement was reached.
In the settlement, it now appears that Mr. Laidely's supplier,
AMNOCO, is to deny him supplies thus making a union ban
unnecessary, and rendering Section 45D irrelevant.
It also appears that the Company's action follows an arrangement
made under the auspices of the Arbitration Commission.
The Government is obviously concerned that this kind of
arrangement can escape the provisions of the Trade Practices Act,
and will look at ways to overcome the problem.
Not only was last week's strike unnecessary, but also it was
avoidable. The reason it was avoidable is simple. The
New South Wales Government has the powers to face up to
militant unions. For reasons known only to themselves, it
fails to do so.
My Government has argued for some time that the difficulties
and confusion created by the division of industrial powers
between the State and theCommonwealth need speedy resolution.
That resolution, important though it is, is in the future.
For the present, the New South Wales Government has powers which
it gave to itself. Last week, as in the past, it failed to
use those powers adequately. In the national interest, such
an attitude must be reversed.
The 1976 New South Wales Energy Authority Act provides that
whenever it appears from any cause that available supplies
of a form of energy were likely to become less than sufficient
for the reasonable requirements of the community; or if it was felt
that an emergency situation existed or was likely to exist in
relation to supplies of energy, then the New South Wales Government
has the power to control and direct the sale, the supply and
the consumption of that form of energy.
It has the power to direct a person or persons to transport
that energy and to distribute it. It has the power to enforce
this provision throughout any part of New South Wales, or
throughout the whole State.
Because these powers exist, it is unacceptable that the well-being
of people in New South Wales has to be regularly sacrificed
while the New South Wales Government, for reasons unknown, yields
to powerful union interests.
As happened last week, the control over fuel supplies in
New South Wales was determined by union leaders, not the
Government. After the strike was in place and it became clear that
New South Wales was going to run short of fuel, the New South Wales
Government did use its emergency powers to freeze supplies of fuel,
and to forbid its sale to all but selected emergency customers.
One might say that the New South Wales Government was exercising
its proper powers in an emergency. / 3
-3-
But now it is reported that the priorities who was to
get and who was to be denied petrol had been determined
by the Transport Workers' Union, not the New South Wales Government.
This was a total abdication of Government responsibility and
demonstrated that the New South Wales Government was not
prepared to stand up and-exercise its authority if it meant an
argument with a powerful union.
The New South Wales Premier attempted to hide the abject
behaviour of his Government behind a public-relations exercise
by proposing a referendum to hand over all State irndustrial
powers to the Commonwealth. Mr. Wran knew very well that a
proposal of that kind even if agreed to by the other Stateswould
only operate in the longer term. It was not relevant
to the current situation.
The New South Wales Government has special powers under its
own Energy Authority Act to control fuel supplies to the
community. Last week we saw these either not used, or used only
under the dictates of a union.
In the oil industry indeed in any industry the ceding of such
powers by the State Government to a union threatens the national
economy. I have said before, the New South Wales Attorney-General is
quick to invoke the law against company directors who do not
operate with the law and so he should be. But why should
union leaders who fail to respond to negotiation and conciliation
be exempt from the provisionsof the law.
There can be no prospect of long-term industrial harmony if
Governments,' abdicate from their responsibility in the face of
difficult decisions. The community must know that justice and
the law can, and will be upheld.
As I said at the outset, there are difficult problems in the
union movement. The notion of where Commonwealth and State powers
begin and end is not always clear to the community. There is
usually a belief that because a dispute has a national effect,
then its solution is within the capacity of the national Government.
The Commonwealth Government does have powers, and will exercise them, as
it must, in an effective and responsible way. But very specific
powers are also held by State Governments and in particular
by the New South Wales Government in relation to last week's
petrol dispute.
Had the New South Wales Government at the outset made it plain
that it would not yield to the absurd demands of sections of
the Transport Workers' Union, then the public could have been
spared the massive dislocation that overtook the State.
In the wool dispute which has halted regular wool sales
throughout Australia since Christmas it was also necessary to
resist unreasonable union demands in this case the
Storemen and Packers' Union. / 4
I
4
Naturally, the Government is hopeful that the Conference
now proceeding before Mr. Justice Williams in Melbourne will
bring an early return to work, so that once again our wool
industry can meet its export obligations.
However, the arrangements agreed to by the brokers, growers
and the Government last Friday will be applied progressively
from tomorrow morning. Their application can only be prevented
by a return to work by the Storemen and Packers' Union.
The Government realises that by responding to the request by
the growers and brokers to bring down regulations to control
the export of raw wool, the entire industry could well be brought
to a halt. The purpose of these regulations will be to ensure
that the industry as a whole has a unified approach to the
dispute, having regard to the gross disruption to normal trade
that has occurred.
Needless industrial disputes, if allowed to continue, can have
a profound effect on the economic recovery that is under way.
What we have gained in the last few years can so easily be
destroyed by industrial disruption: by harmful and damaging
strikes. It is in all our interests to put conflict aside.
Surely, with the opportunities in front of us, it is time to
put Australia first; to think of the national interests before
self-interest; to see that what we do enhances national
well-being rather than damages it.
000---