EMERGENCY ONLY

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 7, 8 July 1931, Page 11

EMERGENCY ONLY

UNEMPLOYMENT ACT

FAKMERS' VIEWS

"SOME ACT NECESSARY"

•Tr.king the view that present economic conditions in New Zealand were extraordinary, the New Zealand. Farmers' Union conference to-day agreed that, as an emergency measure, an Unemployment Act was necessary. Several remits having relation to unemployment were on the order paper, but the conference first disposed of the question as to whether or not there should be an Act of some description. Delegates severely criticised the present Act, particularly as its provisions affect the farming community, but all recognised the need for some measure to provide relief for the present large number of unemployed. The next business of the conference is to consider what form the Act might take. Auckland delegates brought forward tho following remit:— That this conference, whilst endorsing the principles of direct taxation and of true unemployment insurance, calls for the repeal of the Unemployment Act. Supporting tho remit, Mr. H. O. Mellsop (Auckland) said it was not understood that the country could do away with an Unemployment Act altogether. The old measure was simply a palliative, and some real attempt should bo made to. get to the root of the matter and get the country to a state where unemployment, would disappear. Nothing had been, done in that direction. Ho thought they would all agrco that the present Act was not doing anything to get rid of unemployment. It was only wasting money, and was aggravating matters, particularly from tho farmers' point of view. It had bcea a great hardship on the necessitous farmer, who had been debarred from obtaining relief. 'He believed.in unemployment insurance, but those who paid should be entitled to get bonefits. He did. not hold that the farmers should bo driven off the land—in necessitous cases—be-, fore they could get benefits. ;' CUT EXPENSES. Mr. A. A. Ross (Auckland) said that the only solution at tho present time was to cut down expenses in all industries,, but all the schemes now in operation were leading in the opposite direction. They were going to add to costs. Unless there was somo scheme to remove the trouble the position would get worse and worse. . Mr.. W. B. Mathosou (Wellington) tsaid that wo conld not do without an Unemployment Act, but it should bo ajnended in any way that was thought wise. It was easier to make* an aniendrnient than to wipe the Act out and create a new one. Vho president (Mr. W. J. Poison M.1.) said ho entirely agreed with Mr. Matheson. There were 40,000 or 50,000 unen'iployed, and it was not possible to ' let women and children starve in this country. (Hoar, hear.) We were a humane people, and wo could not leave the boxden to charitable aid boards or the' Consolidated Fund. We had to face our responsibilities as a country and handle along well-ordered lines a great canergeney that had come upon us. It vvas the duty of Parliament to do'so. The old Act was not regarded as "being1 entirely satisfactory by anybody; it 'was purely an experiment and was placed on the Statute Book by the unanimous consent of Parliament. None was prepatred to say, without experience, that Jt was going to bo a failure. The new Act varied in, many important particulars, one of the most important • being that relating to women. Mr. Mathason: "Is it a new Act, or an amendment?" ■ Mr. Poison; "Insofar as it departs from the principles of tho old Act it is a new Act. There are a good many new portions in it," Mr. J. Cocker (Eltham): "Why havo domestic servants been exempted?" ■ DOMESTIC SERVANTS. Mr. Poison replied that there was an enormous number of women who were, or could ba, in domestic service. They helped their parents in homes, and constituted a tremendous problem. If they were all to get direct benefit from the Act they all might register as unemployed, and it could bo well imagined what an extraordinary effect that would have. It would break down any Act. Speaking from memory, he thought the number was about 300,000 or 400,000. If they wore not to get substantial benefits it would be hardly fair to extract contributions from \thcm. (Hear, hear.) ■In reply to questions, Mr. Poison explained tho provisions of the now Act. Referring to tho constitution of the board, he said he did not know whether it would be any disadvantage for the board to be appointed by tho Minister. Captain F. Colbcck (Auckland) said that we did not want a permanent Unemployment Act in this country; it was not necessary. We wanted to get down to "tin tacks" and remove unemployment, the cause of which was that we could not pay the charges that ■were inflicted ipon us. Ho referred to increased farm production, and said that we wero much better able to produce butter-fat at 7d a lb than we were itt 1913. But the cost of production, had'been raised artificially, and that had to bo removed. He suggested ' that the conference should insist that something should be done in the way of reducing the cost of living. He knew dozens of companies 'paying no dividend. What would they do with the 10 per cent, reduction? They wero going to try and pay a dividend, iising the reduction in wages to do so. If the wage was more than tho cost of the article, then tho article could not be produced. Mr. E. D. Duxfield- (Horotiu) moved us an amendment: — That this conference, whilst endorsing the principles of direct taxation and of truo unemployment in- . surance, calls for the amendment of the Unemployment Act so that efficiency be tho ruling principle in its administration, and that work of an unproductive character be discontinued, and that works of a permanent productive nature be undertaken; finally, that the whole aim of tho Act should be to eliminate unemployment. Tho amendment was seconded by Mr. W. H. Ward (Southland). PAST LAWS. Mr. L. Keleher (North Canterbury) said that it was very unfortunate that New Zealand should have an Unemployment Act. How did it come here? It came through past legislation. We had. gone through prosperous years and laws were made to keep up with those times. Now there was a time of depression and the country was not able to keep up with that legislation. That legislation should be amended to keep with the times. That would mean going a long way back, back to the freedom of contract all through New Zealand, and we would absorb 90 per cent, of our unemployed. Mr. K. E.. Talbot (Hawkcs • Bay) Agreed that an Unemployment Act was nctessarjji Peppjp* through no fault

of their own, had to bo provided for, and they were not too well provided for under tho present Act. Mr. P. J. Small (primary producers' representative on the Unemployment Board) said that there had been employers of labour who had almost ruined themselves in trying to employ their men, and it had come to the position that either the employers had to go out or the men had to. There wero nearly 10,000 men engaged on productive work to-day. His idea was to put as many men as possibl' *r reproductive work. 'That was th' aim and desire of the board. If they could send out all the single men in the Dominion on to farms, and as many married men as possible, they would be doing something worth while. There was another aspect. Every year 27,000 boys were waiting, to be employed, and the country's secondary industries had to bo foste.red by some means or other, not at a great cost. "But don't quibble at a 'bob' or two to do it," he said. Mr. Matheson: "Arc you suggesting that we should increase our tariffs?" Mr. Small: "No, I am saying that a great many people would save a 'bob' in tho purchase of an article, even if it was foreign." INTERNAL INFLUENCES. Mr. W. Boyd (Auckland) said there was a general agreement about the necessity of an Unemployment Act, but if a permanent measure were placed on tho Statute Book, was that not an admission that we had failed to deal with the question of unemployment in New Zealand? There were external and internal influences, and ho considered that more could be done in relation to the internal influences. Costs must come down, but the politicians did not appear to be anxious to deal with that aspect. He hoped that the Unemployment Board would considc-r land settlement. Mr. J. E. Benson (Poverty Bay) suggested that the Government should pay a full wage and make it a charge against the farmer. Men could bo taken on to farms, and the free labour would be a charge against the farmer. Mr. Mcllsop's motion was withdrawn. Mr. E. H. Murnoy (Tapanui) moved, as an amendment to Mr. Duxfield 's motion :■. —: This conforonco is of opinion that an Unemployment Act is necessary in the present extraordinary condition of the Dominion; that a flat rate of tax is equitable to" raise at least a portion of the fund necessary, and, that employment should be given the unemployed, and not relief by way of a dole. After further discussion, Mr. Murney's motion was carried as follows:— . That an Unemployment Act is necessary, owing to the extraordinary condition of the Dominion, as an emergency measure.