CONTENTIONS

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21246, 18 August 1934, Page 14

CONTENTIONS

XL.—THAT THE RELIEF RATES 4RE NOT ENOUGH TO LIVE ON (■FICUU.T WBITTKR JTOE TB» PMtS.) 'T r •■ I®' GEORGE LAWN.] , ;

Recognition of the importance of providing* adequately for the relief of poverty arising largely out of involuntary unemployment has led in England to careful scientific investigations of living conditions, and, on the basis of the information thus obtained, minimum standards have been formulated for food, housing, clothing, and other necessaries. These standards, which may be regarded as providing no more than the minimum necessary to maintain health and efficiency, are of particular interest to us in New Zealand in view of the widespread discussion whether the sustenance and relief work scales adopted by our national unemployment board are adequate. The most notable recent minimum food standard is that prepared last year by an official committee on nutrition, set up by the British Medical Association, with these terms of reference: "To determine the minimum weekly expenditure on foodstuffs which must be incurred by families of varying size if health and working capacity are to be maintained, and to construct specimen diets." From the various tables prepared by this committee the following has been selected. It shows the minimum food requirements for a family consisting of a man, wife, and three children aged respectively one to two years, six to eight years, and eight to 10 years. The prices, however, have been adjusted to those now prevailing in Christchurch.

These minimum allowances would probably need to be increased to suit New Zealand conditions and prices. Certainly the weekly cost of fuel for heating and cooking would be greater than three shillings a family in the main cities in this country, and rent is from 50 to 75 per cent, higher. If we accept the Bowley estimates of the weekly cost of clothing and light and cleaning materials and raise the weekly fuel allowance to 5s and the rent to 15s, we arrive at the following standard for a family ai man, wife, and three children: Weekly Cost: j s. d. Food .. .. 21 4| Clothing .. ..4 5 Light and cleaning 1 4 Fuel ~ ..5 0 Rent .. .. 15 o Total .. 47 HThis may be regarded as «. minimum subsistence standard s based on the assumption that the money allowed is intelligently spent with very little waste. It makes no allowance for expenditure on sickness, holidays, recreation, news* papers, tobacco, education, furniture, insurances, or other items that should enter into the family budget It cannot be accepted as a decent minimum standard of living com« patible with the high per caput wealth and the productive resouroet of this Dominion.

Weekly totals 21 4| Though it is commonly assumed' that food prices differ widely between New Zealand and Great Britain, the total cost of the quantities and varieties in the foregoing table differs very little in the two countries. The New Zealand cost, is 21s 4|d: the English cost is 20s Old. The construction of tables giving minimum standards for housing, clothing, light, and cleaning materials and fuel is obviously very difficult owing to the very great variety of individual tastes and requirements. Investigations by Professor Bowley resulted in the following estimates of minimum weekly allowances: Clothing: Man. lid. Woman. Is 3d. Child, 9d. Lijjht and Cleaning Materials: Adult, 3Jd. Child, 3d. Fuel: Family, 3s. Kent: Family, 10s.

2553.3 2351.5 11,907.6 81,654 _ . . . _ •! It is, however, higher than the ■ 1 actual allowance paid to a relief 11 worker with a wife and three chii- : j dren. He receives 36s a week Cphu [\ 2s 2d family allowance) if he is on ' | relief work, or 23s 6d a week (plus r f some milk) jf lie is on "sustenance." ,i Even from a purely "business** I j point of view, without regard for 'humanitarian considerations, it is ■tpoor economy to allow any sectioa of the people to live below the "standard necessary to maintain ': health and efficiency. Money thus ■ saved is more than offset by the i heavy costs directly and indirectly j involved in the present and future \ social results of poverty. It is i surely high time that the scales of j "relief' provided for our unem-l ployed should be raised to levels at I least above the mere subsistence - line. There can be no question of iour financial and productive capaIcity to do this.

CarboCost. Protein Fat hydrate Item. i Quantity. E d. (grams). (grams). (grams). Calories, Beef 2Jlb 1 Oi 213.2 208.7 — 2,815 Mutton lib 0 5 50.4 169 2 — 1,780 Minced meat lib 0 4 85.3 83.5 — 1,126 Bacon lib 0 10 46.7 245.8 — 2,478 Corned beef lib 0 5 119.3 84.8 — 1278 Cheese 31b 1 9 349.8 476.4 42.3 6.033 Milk l"i pints 2 11 3272 357.0 476.0 6,615 Kipper Ulb 0 6 80.0 63.0 ■ — 913 Butter 41b 0 5 0.4 188.2 — 1,751 Lard (dripping) ilb 0 li — 226.8 — 2,109 Margarine ilb 0 4 0.4 192.3 — 1,789 Bread 33|lb 6 44 1103.6 30.4 7364J 34J99 Sugar 4Jlb 1 2J — — 2164.6 ££35 Jam lib 0 6 1.4 . — 314.8 1296 Potatoes 71b 0 6 60.2 0.7 574.7 2,611 Tea ilb 1 0 — — ■ — — Oatmeal ilb 0 u 27.0 19.5 158.7 943 Rice lib G 2i 26.8 1.8 3642 1,620 Treacle ilb 0 li 3.6 ■— 135.8 572 Beans Alb 0 2J 422 1.6 141.0 766 Barley ilb 0 U 15.8 1.8 1812 825 Fresh fruit and i green vegetables — 2 0 — — — 500