LOANS WITHOUT A POLL.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 19971, 4 July 1930, Page 20

LOANS WITHOUT A POLL.

UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF. CONDEMNATION OF PRINCIPLE.

Reaffirmation of its previous objection to the empowering of local authorities to raise loans lor the relief of unemployment without taking a poll ot the ratepayers was decided upon by the Council of the Canterbury ihamber of Commerce last evening. Mr A. F. Wright said one ot the Bills before Parliament was the Local Authorities Empowering llolief of Unemployment Extension Bill, which allowed local bodies to raise money for unemployment roliof without a poll. Previously the Council had protested against such a measure, and the Associated Chambers had opposed the principle. Ho would not like it thought that the Chamber was unfriendly towards relief measures, but the principle of allowing money to bo raised in such a way was becoming altogether too common. It was only right that such a power should be given for urgent loans to bring, say, measures nafeguarding public health into effect, but in matters such as unemployment relief, the power given was likely to be abused. The Chamber should consider whether it should not make a protest. Mr W. H. Nicholson said that when the Act was first passed, there was a greater possibility of abuse than was the case to-day. Before a loan was granted now a careful investigation was made by the Local Bodies Loans Board, and the Works programme was closely examined by the Public Works Engineer for the district concerned. If the Government's subsidy of £2 for £1 on all money spent on unemplovment relief was spread fairly over the country, it would be utilised more usefully than in any haphazard relief measures. The care with which every proposal was examined was much greater than before.

"Thin Edge of the Wedge." Mr C. H. Hewlett (chairman): If there wa« no Government subsidy there would be a greater temptation to raise » larger amount. It is a very serious thing if we are going to agree to the principle wo have previously condemned. Once the thin • end of the wedge is in. it will be very difficult to •top it. I Mr T. N. Gibbs said lfc seemed a ihame to load posterity with the responsibility of paying for the relief of unemployment existing at present. Mr V. E. Hamilton said the principle of not giving the ratepayer a voice wria wrong. Mr Wright moved that the Council reaffirm its previous contention that local body loans should not be raised without the previous consent of the ratepavers. Ho said that Mr Nicholson was satisfied with the substitution of a Departmental safeguard for a ratepayers' safeguard. "On broad lines 1 can second that, •aid Mr Nicholson. "The principle behind the motion cannot be assailed on economic lines, hot the unemployed would bo starving if the usual legal procedure *?as fallowed." Mr A. C. Bretherton said a fuuaafnontal principle of taxing was being undermined, and Mr Nicholson's argument was a specious ©ncf. The United States had broken with England for a Similar reason. The motion was carried, and it was rieoidftd to brina; tl}e matter before thn conference of the Associated Chambers; in the form of a remit.