WORK AND SURPLUSES

Evening Post, Volume CXIX, Issue 104, 4 May 1935, Page 11

WORK AND SURPLUSES

' Referring to a statement made by the' Mayor at Brooklyn that C6uncilI'lors Semple,' Chapman, and himself j voted against a "motion to take £10,000 1 from the electricity fund in order to as- | sist the unemployed on relief work, I Councillor McKeen at Houghton Bay 1 said that he wished to state what I actually happened. The Mayor proI posed that £10,000 ; be::-taken from, the electricity funds for relief work. Before that on a^motion by Councillor Butler a special committee had been set up to examine the relief work with a view to considering placing of the men oh standard'wages at standard work. The Labour councillors wanted .the Mayor's proposal referred to. that special committee, with the intention of putting the men on standard works 'and wages. The Mayor did not really require that £10,000. The first year he was in office he took £20,000 (in t,Wo sums of £10,000) from the electricity funds, and finished that year with a £100 deficit. In 1922-1923 another £10,000 was taken, in-1933-1934 £5000, and this year £17,000. All these .sums were taken on the plea of assisting the unemployed. In '1922-1923 Mr. Hisl.op showed a £24,000 surplus. In 1934-1935 he,showed a £30i000 sur,plus. Did he, then, require to take £17,500 from the electricity funds in that year? "When you pay.your, electricity accounts you are paying for 1 this money which has been taken by him to show a surplus at the end of [the year. Since 1926 the sum of. ■ £117i500 has been-taken from the electricity- department of the city," said ''Councillor McKeen.