UNEMPLOYMENT

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21085, 9 February 1934, Page 17

UNEMPLOYMENT

♦ !, CHANGE OF POLICY ASKED j s FOR I ' CRITICISM OF BOARD \ \ ! t I 1 ;.P*ESS 4S3OCIATIOK IBLGGKAU.) j WELLINGTON, February 8. J J In a statement to-day, Mr D. Mc- t Laughlin, national secretary to the f National Union of the Unemployed, ; complains of the Unemployment Board's compelling many committees \ to resign because of lack of co-opera- . tion, and says that it seems determined to put the local committees out of business and vest control in the hands of the Commissioner of Unemployment in Wellington. In 1931, he says, Parliament clearly saw that four men largely domiciled in Wellington could not possibly administer the unemployment fund accord- , ing to the varying needs and condi- j tions of .every area without the co- j operation of district committees, and he says the solution of the present . trouble lies in a complete change of policv by the board and that this can | best be secured by the unemployment ; committees functioning as intended j by the legislation which established them. I LACK OF UNITY |i STATEMENT HY NATIONAL J j j BODY J J A decision not to go any further, in | I the meantime, with the proposed na- j tional strike of unemployed is indi- j cated in a statement, which, according j to an official connected with the North Canterbury Provincial Council of Unemployed, has been issued by the national executive of the National Unemployed Workers' Movement. This latter organisation was responsible for the recent ballot among unemployed on the question of a strike. The Christchurch official said last evening that the movement had issued the following statement from Wellington:— "After a careful analysis of the strike position, we realise clearly that to carry on the strike without the necessary amount of efficient organisation would serve no useful purpose, j and would definitely tend to create i widespread disunity. The national j executive has passed the following j resolution: i " 'Reviewing the result of the «aI tional strike ballot, we affirm that although there is a nation-wide discontent with the policy of the Government and the Unemployment Board, this discontent, especially in the main centres, is not organised under the leadership of the one united body, | and thus a national strike cannot be • effective. . In the country districts, i however, the conditions are so intolerI able that relief workers have no other ! alternative to strike. The national executive fully endorses these strikes, and will continue to organise all possible support for them. The present strike movement is by no means the end of the struggle of the unemployed. . . . The result of ' the present strike ballot shows that j out of 35 towns and camps, only four | furnished returns against a strike. A i total of nearly 13,000 votes was reI corded, of which 8500 were in favour jof a national strike. The absence of I national unity alone prevented the carrying out of a national strike. It is urgently necessary, therefore, to unite all unemployed under the banner of the National Union.' "