STATEMENT BY LABOURERS’ UNION OFFICIAL

Evening Star, Issue 21099, 11 May 1932, Page 6

STATEMENT BY LABOURERS’ UNION OFFICIAL

MR COATES BLAMED WELLINGTON, May 11. Mr Butler, secretary of the Labourers’ Union, said: “ The reason the unemployed are on strike is because they will not have sufficient food for themselves and their families. The new scheme, coming on top of long months of suffering, has further accentuated their misery. On Monday a majority of the men voted in favour of a strike rather than face the rigours of the winter with a reduced allowance. Delegates from the majority of the jeljs met and held the men from this action pending a further appeal to Mr Coates. The delegates made application to see Mr Coates on Monday forenoon, but the request was not granted. An- interview was arranged with the Unemployment Board late in the afternoon, and the delegates advised their men to remain on the jobs, pending a reply from the board. The delegates simply requested the board to allow a continuation of the old scheme, with the usual rations from the social welfare department. They realised that the old scheme was not much good, but the new scheme was worse. The vice-chairman of the board (Mr Jessep) stated that the new scheme was more expensive to the boat'd, but, notwithstanding the fact that the men wanted the old scheme, the board refused this application.’’ Mr Butler said: “ A deputation from the Citizens’ Unemployment Committee, headed by the mayor, waited on Mr Coates yesterday. All the members of the committee pointed out to Mr Coates the inadequacy of the wages of the new scheme, and the mayor especially stressed the insufficiency of the allowance. Mr Coates stated that this was being met by arrangements which had been made to provide the men with rations in addition to wages. Mr Coates’s statement was not correct in regard to the arrangements being made for rations. Mr Godfrey (Commissioner ,of Unemployment) then stated that it would take days to complete arrangements for rations. From then onwards it was obvious that the Minister was out of touch with the arrangements (or lack of arrangements) _ which his board had under consideration. Mr Coates refused to make a definite statement beyond saying that he would confer with the members of the board and make a statement to the Press on the following day. The urgency of the matter was fully impressed on Mr Coates by the deputation, and he was warned of what was likely to occur. He refused to say anything more, and the deputation retired. Had Mr Coates been aware of the lack of provision made by his board, then, after he was made aware of the position by the mayor and others, it was his duty to tackle the matter immediately. He made a promise that he would investigate matters and make a statement this morning, and now he further complicates matters by hiding behind the affair of last evening, and breaks his promise, He and his board are responsible for the whole affair, due to failure to make arrangements for the change over, and it is due to the public that he should face his responsibilities instead of blaming men whom he has incensed by his inaction and incompetency.”