UNEMPLOYMENT

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21088, 13 February 1934, Page 14

UNEMPLOYMENT

♦ MEETING OF CITY COMMITTEE SUBSIDY ON LOCAL BODY . WORKS Some astonishment was expressed by members of the Christchurch Unemployment Committee when a letter from the Unemployment Board was read at the meeting of the committee yesterday, stating that it had in operation a scheme for subsidising works undertaken by local bodies, at standard rates of pay, with the object of reducing the number of men on the No. 5 scheme. The committee had written to the board making suggestions on similar lines. The action of some local bodies in dismissing their permanent men and taking on relief workers in their place was another matter discussed. The meeting was attended by Cr. E. H. Andrews i chairman >, Messrs George Maginness, F. W. J. Belton, George Harper, A. Pcvenll. W. E. Leadley, W. W. Scarff. R. T. Bailey, Mrs A. I. Fraer. the Rev. F. T. Read, and Mr W. J. Holloway vacting-hon-orary secretary). The Minister for Employment (the Hon. Adam Hamilton) wrote acknowledging the committee's resolution with respect to Mr R. T. Bailey, officer in charge Labour Department, Christchurch, to the effect that the committee did not agree that Mr Bailey should be moved from this district, and in thanking the committee for its communication, said the representations of the committee would be given every consideration. The letter was received. i Subsidy on Works of Local Boflics Mr W. Bromley, for the commis- j sioner, wrote that he was directed by | the board to thank the committee for I its suggestions with reference to in-| slituting full-time employment for I relief workers, and to state that the I board, for some time past, had been j making arrangements similar to those | suggested by the committee. "In ■ Auckland the city council is carrying out fairly large works that it would not otherwise do, and a subsidy is being provided by the Unemployment Board, a condition of the subsidy being that the work is carried out i under normal standard conditions, with the exception that five days a week may be regarded as a full week to qualify for the subsidy. Similar arrangements arc operating in sev- ! eral places, notably in Mount Albert, j Rotorua, and Dunedin, and I can assure your committee that if local bodies in and around Christchurch submit, similar proposals to the Unemployment Board sympathetic consideration j is assured." ' Mr Belton asked why the committee did not know about this before. Mr Leadley said that it showed a lack of co-operation between the board and the local committees. It the Christchurch committee had known that the board was making these arrangements with local bodies, the committee could have forwarded its sug- j gestions to the board long ago. : Mr Belton said that he was aston- ' ished that local bodies in and about i Christchurch did not know of the j board's scheme. | The chairman said that member.-1 of the Christchurch City Council thought that it was useless" to ask for more than the present quota. It was decided to write to the Auckland City Council and ask how the scheme was working in Auckland. Mr Scarff said that the committee would appreciate information from the board about <ucb schemes. A week ago the Unemployment Commissioner (Mr C. G. Godfrey) had told them that the board desired to co-ordinate with the committee. On the motion of Mr Scarff it was decided to write to the board expressing the committee's desire to co-oper-ate with the board. | Access to Lees Valley ; The Commissioner of Unemployment wrote in reply to the committee's letter drawing attention to the state of the Lees Valley road, and urging the establishment of an unemployment relief camp, that the improvement of roads was not a function of the Unemployment Board, although in many instances relief labour was employed in that direction. The actual establishment and operation of relief camps was undertaken by local bodies, or de- ! partments of State, such as the Pubi lie Works Department, Lands Depart-1 ment, etc. If some concrete proposal regarding the improvement of the Lees Valley road were put forward, either by the Oxford County Council or by the Main Highways Board, the Unemployment Board would be prepared to consider offering some i assistance by way of relief labour. I Mr Scarff said that this was a mat- ' ter that members of the committee had put before the commissioner when he visited the city recently. Mr Godfrey ! had taken close notes about the road. ■ He also had given them to under- ! stand that some local bodies had put 1 off all their permanent hands, and i were doing the whole of their work , with relief labour, and the name of ' one local body that had done so 'had been mentioned. He urged that they j should press the matter of the Lees j Valley road. i The chairman said that he had made I the round trip last week, and it had been "some trip." At one point it had taken Ave hours to do 20 miles. He had found that the surface of the Lees Valley road was particularly | good; the trouble was the absence of a bridge over the Ashley river. That river had been in flood more or less for months. There was necessity for the widening of the road at certain I parts where it was not desirable for motorists to meet a wagon. Mr Bailey said that he had visited the district three weeks ago, and though the surfacemen built up the roads after rains and floods, the next rains and floods washed away what they had built up, whereas if culvert pipes were put in, the water would be, taken away. I The chairman: It would mean a great deal to the returned soldier settlers if a bridge were built over the Ashley. The matter was discussed with Mr P. R. Climie. a member of the Un-

employment Board, and Mr E. A. Gibson, assistant engineer, Public Works Department, and it was decided that a deputation consisting of the chairman (Cr. E. H. Andrews) and Mrs j | Fraer, should wait on Mr F. Langbein, District Engineer, Public Works Department, with the view of getting a relief workers' camp established to improve the road. | Local Bodies and Relief Workers Mr Maginness referred to the statement by the commissioner (mentioned by Mr Scarff), about local bodies discharging their permanent men and taking on relief labour, and asked what action had been taken. * The chairman said that no action had been taken, the commissioner having mentioned the matter when explain- t ing why, in a particular district, the : quota of work was not being provided. Mr Maginness said that there was no reason why the actual unemployed should be victimised because of local bodies doing a wrong thing. Mr Scarff: The local body mentioned should be carrying six ordinary men. Mr Bailey: More men than that. Mr Scarff said that in the Cashmere 'riding of the Heathcote county they I were carrying their permanent as well !as relief workers. At the latest meet- ! ing of the county council they had I discussed a sewerage scheme for anI other part of the county, on which re- ! lief workers might be employed. Mr Maginness said that action had | been taken against some farmers who j had discharged their regular workmen \ to take on relief labour. i The chairman: The matter is under | review by the board, and it is prob- j able that the local bodies concerned ) will be refused any relief labour. Mr Maginness: Then they will have ' to pay sustenance. Mr Bailey: The local body concerned ■ will have to repair its roads and will , have to put on its permanent men. Mr Scarff suggested that the board should be written to on the subject, but the chairman assured him that i the board was dealing with the matter, , and dealing with it drastically. Unemployment Relief Schemes Mr W. Bromley, writing on behalf of ' the commissioner, and replying to the committee's request to be supplied with full particulars of the latest susten- j ance scheme in operation in England, i wrote that copies of the unemployment; bill, at present before Parliament in | England, had not been received by the ' New Zealand Parliamentary Library, and the Unemployment Board had not, been able, so far, to obtain particulars of tiie new unemployment proposals. Details of unemployment schemes in all countries could be obtained from the International Labour Oflicc. Geneva. It was decided to communicate withi; the High Commissioner about the in-! ; formation wanted. i, Relief Measures Mr Harper, reporting on the relief j measures of the Metropolitan Relief! Association, said that since he re- : , ported a fortnight ago, the number of I] applicants 'including their families), 11 numbered KiUG; the number of new ap- j plicants was 20. All were bona fide I. applicants; the depot had not been | called upon to provide extra relief to other persons—there had been no complaints from the Rapaki relief workers. ; The number of applicants was considerably more than at the correspond- : ing date last year, but was not as great as the number he reported a fortnight ago. The report was received. PROCEEDS OF ART UNIONS THE .MINISTER'S ATTITUDE ; CRITICISED In reply to tile protest made by the Canterbury Trades and Labour Coun- , cil against the allocation of the pro- ! ceeds of art unions, the Minister for ' Internal Affairs, the Hon. J. A. Young, i has written:— | "I am sorry that your council con- | siders that the Government is not aware that distress is prevalent and j widespread at present. Such a state- ; lent is hardly supported by the fact ; that an amount of some £45.000 was : distributed for relief purposes from - the last six art unions out of a total net profit of £57,000.*' "It seems extraordinary how the | Minister has arrived at these figures. We would be glad to know how he did it," commented Mr W. J. Green, secretary to the council. The Minister, lie added, had evaded the council's ; question—why had £3OOO been allocated to a jockey club from the pro- , ceeds of the last art union, another ' £2BOO to sports clubs, and only £IOOO for the relief of distress in the foi::■ centres'.' INTERFERENCE RESENTED RESOLUTION OK KAIAPOI COMMITTEE In reply to the recent newspaper j report about the treatment of unemployed by the Kaiapoi Unemployment Committee, a special meeting of the committee last night passed the following resolution:— "That .the Kaiapoi Unemployment Committee does not approve interferj er.ee in its business by the DeputyMayor of Christchurch and Mr E. J. Howard, M.P. It considers that local politicians would be well-advised to enquire about the correctness of statements made by the leaders of a group of never-satisfied men who are the principals of a certain faction among the unfortunate unemployed of Kaiapoi. As a committee we consider that verification of statements made to public men not connected with Kaiapoi affairs should have been investigated [ before any notice, much less action, were taken. The Kaiapoi Unemployment Committee has not at any time refused to receive a deputation of individuals representing the registered unemployed in the district. The committee considers that the interference from Christchurch is lacking in common decency and is of the opinion that j if similar methods had been adopted by Kaiapoi officials towards Christchurch affairs, it would not have been tolerated for a minute by the present , governors of the city of Christchurch." \