UNEMPLOYMENT

Evening Post, Volume CXIII, Issue 61, 14 March 1927, Page 14

UNEMPLOYMENT

GOVERNMENT SCHEME "CONDEMNED BY MR. HOLLA2TO (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) WESTPOBT, 13th March. Speaking at the monthly meeting of the Westport branch of the Labour Party, Mr. H. E. Holland, Leader of the Opposition, said that he unhesitatingly condemned the Government's proposals to cut down the wage standards on relief works for unemployed. They had probably not had for many years an unemployed problem of such magnitude in the summer and autumn months as confronted them this year, indicating a far more seriotts condition of things during the winter months. In the 1925 election fight Mr. Coates was being proclaimed as the "man who gets [things done." Now they found him apologetically, saying that ''interests of the country and the dictates of humanity render it necessary that at the ! present moment'the utmost should be done that can be done." By wayofipreamble to this the Prime Minister had protested that the Government could not reasonably be expected to shoulder the whole responsibility of finding employment for those out of -work.

His (Mr. Holland's) reply was that the interests of the country were not served and the dictates oft humanity were not regarded when men were required to undertake heavy and laboriours work at sweated rates' of wages on which they could not maintain their wives and families in ordinary decency and comfort. • Furthermore, Mr. Coates could not be permitted to overlook the fact that the situation as they had it to-day represented the Government's policy working out its inevitable results m the direction of economic chaos and consequent unemployment.' They hadmade no attempt to understand the changing economic conditions abroad or make provision for their failure to deal effectively with importations of coal, timber, etc. No Government could escape responsibility in the matter of ensuring that the citizens of the country were fully employed, for every unemployed man represented an emphatic loss to' the community. There were two main principles which should be observed in finding, work for unemployed. In the. first,place, the wages paid should be standard rates obtaining for the class of work to be, done. It cost jiist as much to keep the family of a man employed oto relief work as it cost to keep any other 'family of similar size. Indeed, in the' majority of cases, it would cost 1 more, for the unemployed worker would probably have to go far from home to a relief job, and would therefore :have two homes to keep. Since" relief uay was to be 12s a day, which woald not amount to more than £3 a week, 1 allowing for wet; days, a married man would be lucky if,he were able to send home 30s a week. 7 Even if work were close to his home, no ordinary family could be maintained on 12s' a day. In the second place, works to be put in hand should be ,the most urgently needed roads and railways, some of which would be_ of great economic value, inasmuch as they aided both production and distribution by providing easy access to and. from markets. If the works undertaken were necessary, there could be no excuse for not paying standard wages. Besides, how would the Government justify its/dis-, regard of its own agreements with variour unions? If unemployed workers who might or might not be members of the New Zealand Workers' Union, for instance,, were being sent on to railway' works, would the agreement rates apply, or would the men be required to take the non-union rate of 9s and-12s a day? He predicted that many married men would find themselves /quite unable to accept work at 12s a day,, because of the impossibility of maintaining their families. There could be no excuse on the ground of lack of money for cutting the wage rate, and he anticipated that plenty' of trouble would ttccrue from this determination. \