IN FAIRNESS TO ALL

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 71, 25 March 1931, Page 8

IN FAIRNESS TO ALL

An essential part of the Government's economy proposals is lliat they should not be limited to the Public Service. The Prime Minister, in informing the country of his plans, made an appeal to local bodies and private employers to adopt a similar course, so that a general regrading of wages would result in a reduction of the cost of living. If the adjustment were to end with Government costs there would be little prospect of this cost-of-living reduction, and if the Government now whittles away its proposals how can its appeal to private employers be sustained? The aim of the Government measm-es is to bring about a fairer distribution of work and pay. At present the burden lies heavily on some sections—on the farmers whose returns have fallen out of all proportion to the reduclion in costs and on those workers who have had, not a 10 per cent, cut, but a 100 per cent. —the loss of their jobs. If all now make some sacrifice the sacrifice enforced on the few will be lessened. But if first one class and then another is to be exempted the success of the adjustment will be imperilled. It is necessary to point out that the Public servant earning less than £300 a year, though' he has no substantial margin, is yet better placed than the private employee whose basic wage is reduced by loss of time. If the Government now agrees to grade the reduction below £300, how can it ask private employers to make any adjustment in the wages of their employees whose earnings are less than £1 a day?

The suggestions of llie Leader of the Opposition were put before the Prime Minister with a fair recognition of the latter's responsibility. Mr. Coates agreed that Mr. Forbes had to find the money, and he did not attempt to dictate a course for him. We trust that this attitude will be maintained. It is the Government's responsibiliy to say whether it can adopt the suggestions, and it must look not only to the revenue aspect but to the general effect on the community. A special arrangement with railwaymen was proposed, and to this there would seem to be no objection; but there is, indeed, a grave difficulty, as anything resembling exemption opens the door to similar claims. The most acceptable of Mr. Coates's suggestions was that for modifying the cut in the lower grades to meet the fall in the cost of living —seven to eight per cent. —with a proviso that the remaining three per cent. reduction should operate when the cost of living had fallen to 10 per cent. But even this would entail revision of the Government's estimates of saving, and it would be necessary to find some equitable means of making good the loss. And wherever the Prime Minister may turn for further revenue or further savings he is met by objections.