FAMILY MAN'S "INCOME

Evening Post, Volume CXXIII, Issue 55, 6 March 1937, Page 8

FAMILY MAN'S "INCOME

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—"Equity" has not quite grasped, my proposals for supplementing the means of families. My plan covers both employed and unemployed workers, although I admit that the scale I suggested is a bare minimum. What I endeavoured to do was to set out a scheme which would be no more costly so far as State payments are concerned than the present system of relief, and which would actually be -a great deal less expensive' to ■ administer. "Equity" asks what;of the man with £2 5s a week. He cannot be referring to the married man with no family. ' Now for the man with one child, his income would be increased to £2 7s 6d a week; for the man with two children,.! to £2 15s, and so on, whether he were an employed worker or one on relief pay. The outstanding anomaly of the present relief arrangements is that they allow a man with no family to receive full relief although he supplements his relief pay up to £3, and exactly the same maximum is permitted to the man with a number of children. . .

1•■ My. proposals would,, save: the; relief funds''a matter of £f per week on nearly half the total number 6t unemployed, who are married men without children, yet they would substantially increase the minimum weekly income in each group of unemployed men. At the same time they would end the present chaotic condition, under which one unemployed worker may have £3 per week while another in the same class can have no more than 38s 6d. The full scale which I have suggested would guarantee the following minimum rates and ensure equality of treatment all round:—

£ s. d. Single man, relief work 1 10 . 0 Single man, sustenance .... 15 ,0 Married man (no children) ... 2 0 0 Married man (one child) .... 2 .7 6 Married man (two children) 2 15 0 Married man (three children) 3 2 6 Married man (four children) 3 10 0 Married man (five children) 3 17 6 Married man (six children) 4 5 0

The responsibility of the State would be reduced by every penny that the worker earned. :, . . , 'As time would show, it might be possible to raise these rates all round by 5s or 10s or even ideally by £1. I think a reasonable basic wage for the adult male could be struck (at £2 10s a week for a commencement. I suggest that the proposals,,if given effect, would have a powerful influence in reducing the objection to large fami-lies.-lametc., ( SECRETARy; Island Bay Relief Workers' Association.