MEN'S POINT OF VIEW

Evening Post, Issue 19, 23 July 1934, Page 10

MEN'S POINT OF VIEW

BOARD'S FIRST DUTY

The secretary of the National Union of Unemployed, Mr. D. McLaughlin, today made the following comment upon the-statement made by Mr, Bromley:— Mr. Bromley sets,up a ease which is intended chiefly to prove that for purely economic reasons it is'justifiable to compel the B class "sustenance" men and their families to iiye. on much less than. ordinary subsistence level.

The few Who voluntarily accept sustenance are not in the question at all. If a man elects for this low level, then he is wholly responsible. The Ouehunga men whom Mr." Bromley cites as having elected to1 accept sustenance did not dp so wholly voluntarily; it was, as. the Unemployment Board is fully aware, an , act of'protest' against tho innovation of task or piecework on the No. 5 scheme'jobs there, the only alternative to sacrifice of a' just principle being so-called "sustenance."'- '

The plain, issue at stake is this: Several thousands'of New Zealand's families ax©; at ; present' trying to' live a human existence on sums ranging from 15s to' £T 6s per week, and all the economic 'reasoning on earth - cannot justify its existence,if the necessary basis- is the inipoverishnient of thousands of human souls, and this is- the' basis of so-called "sustenance.''

'■"We aro repeatedly told that to preserve the fund is, the' board's primary duty. We claim, and defy contradiction, that tho board's;aiid the Government's primary duty is to preserve the human lives, dependent, on. the fund, and any other view which' is contrary to this ;is inhuman'and-unworthy of a civilised, Christian' country;'-.-". . "■■-.'" The £2oO,ooo'set aside by the board for the "purpose of experimenting with new industries could "provide the primary needs of every "sustenance" family in the Dominion. The necessity for now industries; is non-existent, but that of human' families is ever present: and ever-recurring../ ■:•'; .'■ ~ , To quote ordinary present-day standard .wages.as a level, below which the sustenance rates must be kept, is fallacious reasoning,, and:takes no- aecount-of tne tact; that standard; .wages are not family living wages. .If the .present economic order 'cannot '■ permit ■ families to have access to the means of decent family existence, then it.must be radically altered to fit human needs, because these n.e,vor alter.