COUNCIL AND WAGE CUT.

Evening Star, Issue 21715, 9 May 1934, Page 14

COUNCIL AND WAGE CUT.

TO THB EDITOR Sir, —Mr R. Harrison, in reply to “ Ratepayer,” says that 1 am deserving of condemnation for my conclusions. It” js very unfortunate that any individual should have an opinion at all outside the Labour fraternity and have the courage to express it. Ho asks: Would the icfusal to grant the ’LI per cent, eliminate the tragedy or even [ho destitution?” “Ratepayer” never said it -would, but seeing that Labour represents the workers and in view of the fact that there is any amount of work to bo done in and around the city, some parts of which arc an absolute disgrace to the powers that be, it would have .been a more humane act to havo given some of the deserving relief workers a chance to earn a hotter living, and the ratepayers would be getting some improvements to the streets and footpaths to which they arc entitled, and which are long overdue Labour- representatives are supposed to ho of a more reasonable type of mind than tire other representatives, ami they have interests in common, hut, unfortunately, they arc there to perpetuate the present system of dog eat dog until everyone is exterminated, which the present attitude has proved. Oar friend, Mr Harrison, refers to some of the platitudes defending investors. I am not concerned about investors at the moment. Hie question 1 raised was about restoring a part of the 10 per cent, cut to the corporation employees, who have steady jobs as compared to those individuals who havo no jobs and no prospects. The £I,OOO a week paid . in interest does not enter into the question I raised, which was one of discrimination by the Labour representatives and the other members of the council. Air Harrison says the-Labour representatives on the council arc not so silly as to believe that a 2i per cent, increase in wages would increase purchasing power' When 1 understand what constitutes purchasing power 1 will write in quite a different strain. I know sufficient about purchasing power to know that when I have the money in my pocket to purchase an article I want' that is purchasing power. _ The Premier’s statements that there is no hope of restoring wage cuts at the present time is perfectly correct under the present system. Flo may he looked upon as a fool, hut he is not so silly as the Labour advocates who are determined to go on trying to milk a dry cow.—l am, etc., RATr.rAVF.n. : May 9.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—lt is quite evident that " Ratepayer ” drew the badger, but.it is unfortunate that bis would-be protagonists should stoop to such vilification. Mr Silverstone says my letter was a line example of extravagant and in aeon rate statements, ami that 1 could not avoid showing my anti-Labour bias. J. am anything but anti-Labour, but 1 don’t stand for Ramsay MacDonald Labour. How three Labour councillors could do this without the other councillors’ assistance does not enter my head. It is quite evident that what entered the Labour councillors’ heads was dynamite, as when Labour representatives arc elected to a governing body, a Labour supporter expects something that is elevating from them instead,of perpetuating a system of picking one another’s pockets. Labour on the platform and off is continually advocating restoration of the wage cuts under the present system, which is a physical impossibility without incurring more debts. My opponents have drawn my attention to the existing debts that interest has to be paid on. There is no excuse for the action that the Labour councillors took, whether with or without the assistance of the other councillors. These Labour representatives are not concerned about the financially embarrassed-unemployed ratepayers, only with those in employment. Seeing that an overwhelming number of council employees arc ratepayers, according to your correspondent —which I very much doubt—when the workless bankrupt ratepayers have been exterminated the overwhelming number of council employees will bo called upon to pay the whole of the rates to keep themselves in a job and the increased interest burden that lias been created. The process is automatic. The capitalist system is a selfterminating one, and the effort to keep it going beyond a certain time is an effort against Nature. Mr Silverstone should know. If the council had money to spare and could not sec its way to reduce the rates or minimise the increase it is making, it could have done what 1 stated in reply to Air Harrison. The contents of Mr. Silverstone’s letter are typical, and what one would expect from him. He says we have no protests from ratepayers or the ratepayers’ class against the rise of municipal loan interest from so and so to so and so. I am quite as much concerned about these matters as any Labour representatives. If we did not have this interest burden our rates could be reduced considerably, but it is no use squealing about spilt milk. Are the Labour representatives concerned about the welfare of the workers in general? The question 1 have raised makes me very suspicions, and I have inv doubts. As to the different rating systems. 1. am quite as well informed on those matters as Mr Silverstone, and have bad experience under both .systems; but the question-at issue is not interest burdens or rating systems, it is a question of city employees versus the unemployed ratepayers and other unfortunates. It does not concern the ratepayer who cannot pay bis rates what system ho is rated under.—l am. '■tf-. R.VTEI’AYKU. May 9.