PRESS OFFICE TRANSCRIPT 7I/ 3(
Prime Minister interviewed by Press on Oil Tanker Drivers dispute.
Question: Wilson)
P. M. why have you decided to ask the Arbitration Commission
to adjourn the National Wage Case?
Prime Minister:
Well I think we need to understand that there is a particularly
unreasonable dispute on, which is now tying up oil supplies
right throughout Australia. This isn't an argument really
between employees and an employer, it is an argument within
a union within one union, it's not even a demar-cation dispute
between two unions and the Transport Workers Union's Melbourne
branch are virtually saying that members of thle same union in
the country, in Victoria but employed by a distributor in
Victoria, are not entitled to drive petrol trucks. This is
the height of absurdity, and it is the height of unreasonableness
when you get a situation in which the whole of this nation can
be held up by the executive act of one union because they want
some members of their own union not to be able to do certain
work. I think this particular dispute highlights in a way that
we haven't seen for a long time the utter irresponsibility and
the total selfishness of some people in the union movement,
and it's hard even to say that they are putting their own self
interest first, because it's difficult to see any interest in
this particular case. But their action will certainly result
in a number of people becoming unemployed for different
periods as oil dries up, and it makes a farce of trade union
claims to be concerned about unemployment.
Question: Power)
Mr Fraser, is the Government considering other options to deal
with the dispute?
Prime Minister:
Tony Street and myself commissioned a report from officials
the middle of yesterday afternoon, and I think they were
working on that late last night, and I expect the reports on my
desk and Tony Street's desk now.
Question: Wilson)
What will you gain by having the Wage Case adjourned though, Sir?
Prime Minister:
I think it will show that we are serious about these particular
matters. It will be up to the wage case to determine whether
it will be adjourned or not, but the Victorian Premier has
told mec that he will certainly support us in that particular
move, and maybe other people will in addition. We need to / 2
-2
understand the seriousness of the situation in which one union
says oil supplies to Australia must cease. That's not just
oil supplies to motorists who use petrol to get to work, it'-s
also oil supplies to all industries, small industries and
large industries, and it's an act that can tie up this nation.
Let's get back to the reason why, because this particular union
in Victoria is saying that members of the same union, but who
happen to live in the country part of Victoria instead of in
Melbourne are not entitled to do the same work as their union
brothers who live in Melbourne are entitled to dop. Now, surely
that is about one of the most unreasonable causes for a
stoppage that one has ever heard. If it was a local stoppage
affecting one small part of Australia it would be bad enough,
but take a stoppage of that kind and make it a national strike,
I believe it is the height of absurdity. The tragedy of it is
it can do a great deal of harm, and as we have seen on other
occasions, when you have a major dispute of this kind many
businesses, small businesses, can be so grieviously hit that
people who are stood down as a result of the dispute sometimes
fail to regain their jobs because the businesses are unable
to re-employ as a result of the financial damage.
Question: Power)
Mr Fraser, do you support Mr Hamrer's action in asking Mr Gorman,
the Seymour Services proprietor, to withdraw his actions?
Prime Minister:
If all bans were withdrawn that would not be an unreasonable
action, that is the basis of Mr Hamer' s request. But there
should be no suggestion that that action should be withdrawn,
and the union win in relation to this issue, because the
Seymour proprietor is taking this action not necessarily'in
defence of his own financial interests, but in defence of
his own employees who have been driving his petrol trucks and
who are members of the Transport Workers Union. So this again
gets back to the crux of the issue. It is in this particular
instance the section of the law, section 45B, is being used
to protect the rights of Trade Unionists against the predatory
and unreasonable actions of their fellows in the same union.
If the union withdraws all its bans, if the union indicates
that Mr Gorman' s employees, members of the T. W. U.,, are entitled
to do the work, then I would believe there is no further cause
for Mr Gorman' s action to continue. But in the face of a
continuation of union's bans I would believe that Mr Gorman
has no alternative, and certainly nobody should suggest to
him in those circumstances that he should withdraw his action.
I know that what Mr Hamer has said is on the basis of all
bans being withdrawn.