BUILDING SUBSIDY

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 135, 10 June 1933, Page 14

BUILDING SUBSIDY

AID TO EMPLOYMENT

BOARD'S POLICY DEFENDED

CALL FOE ASSISTANCE

(By Telegraph.—Press Association.) BLENHEIM, This Day. Important reference was made today by Mr. J. S. Jessep, deputy-chairman of the Unemployment Board, to tho new building subsidy scheme, in replying' to criticisms levelled at it. In doing so he did not mince matters, but staunchly defended the move as one designed to assist an industry which he asserted had been adversely affected probably more so than any fither single branch of business in the Dominion—by the depression.- . 1 Sir. Jessep contended that the action taken by the board was more than justified by the circumstances. "There is no trade worse off at present than the building industry," he said. "It is nearly dead. It is estimated that not 10 per cent —a liberal estimate would be -20 per cent., but reliable men say 10 per cent. —of the men formerly engaged in the building trade are in work in that trade today. • Taking it at 20 per cent., we have 80 per cent, of the tradesmen idle. The board, after a lot of thought, decided that from our point of view thero was no trade that we could attempt to stimulate and no trade that would relievo the pressure on the' unemployment funds more. I want to stress that point, and would induce men who have funds to spend to commence spending now. "SPEND IT NOW." "Some criticism has been levelled at tho scheme from the point of view that we are going to put money into the pockets of men who can well afford to' put up a building, perhaps a big building," he continued. "Well, that is not our point of view. We really are asking the assistance of any man whb has the money to spend it now. After all, the labour on a building, a big building particularly, is a small part of the total expenditure." Mr. Jessep said that the building scheme was not the only one under which the board was subsidising heavily in order to get men on to useful work. "Under scheme 4b," he pointed out, "we are asking the assistance of any man of means, and I say quite distinctly that I don't care if he is the wealthiest man or institution in New Zealand; if he will do development work of any description which, under ordinary economic conditions, would not be 'done, we will pay 50 pelcent, of the cost. That applies to v the drainage of lands, bush-felling, scrubcutting, and so on. We welcome the man who will pay his 50 per cent. We can stand up to, all the criticism that comes along. We may be indirectly assisting the man with money, but otherwise he is not going to do the work. ■ We are, in fact, very willing to find our 50 per cent., and we consider it some of the best type of work we are doing in New Zealand today."