UNEMPLOYMENT SUBSIDIES

Greymouth Evening Star, 2 December 1930, Page 5

UNEMPLOYMENT SUBSIDIES

POLICY OF THE BOARD AUCKLAND MEMBERS EXPLAIN [SPECIAL TO “STAB.”] AUCKLAND, December 1. An explanation of the £25,000 subsidy offer of the Unemployment Board, and the allied proposals for unem-: ployment relief, was given a wellattended conference of Auckland district local body representatives, at the Town Hall, this morning, by Messrs G. Finn and O. Mcßrine, the Auckland members of the Board. The Mayor (Mr G. Baildon) presided. Mr Finn said that at the moment,

the Unemployment Board hardly knew where it was. Its work so far had been of a preliminary nature, including meetings with various departmental representatives, and dealing with urgent appeals for the relief of distress in certain districts. It was realised that .something must be done immediately, without waiting to for mulate a policy or frame regulations. It was therefore decided to make the subsidy offer, and it was hoped that the local bodies would energetically take the matter up. Already applications had been received from Greymouth, Christchurch, and other places. In view of the position in Auckland, it was recognised that that city would require a substantial amount. He .was unable to indicate what the allocation would be until the application for it was received, but he could say the Board would do all it possibly could. It was hoped by midday to-morrow to sanction some of the subsidies so that work could be provided immediately in the districts affected. “You have as Minister of Labour, a very keen man, indeed,” said Mr Finn In iiis opinion, the people also had a sympathetic Unemployment Board. It was not possible to please everybody but the Board would do everything it co’uld to relieve the position. Mr Finn explained the functions of the Board, and said that the Board desired to set up as little organisation as possible. It did not want to spend its funds in the payment of officials, and it hoped to leave the bulk of that 1 work to the departments already established.

“The day of relief work is passed, and I hope that in the future all reference to “relief work” will be omitted,” said -Mr Finn, in referring to criticism. “I do not think it should be the duty of the Board to say what the rate of pay should be. That is a matter that should be decided by the Arbitration Court, and not by the Unemployment Board. Our function is to provide work. I think we can drop the words “relief work.” It js no longer relief work and there should be no opprobrium attached to people who have to accept work provided for them by local unemployment committees or any local bodies. I hope before long the word “unemployment” will go out too. The Board has been called the Unemployment Board. It should have been called the Employment Board.”

Mr Mcßrine said the members of the Board were not present to discuss policy, but to obtain the views of the local bodies’ representatives on the subsidy proposal. Whether the Board could succeed, depended upon the support it received from the community. Although it was possible that the exemptions from the payment of the levy would be fairly considerable, it was estimated that the Board’s in come from the levy would be ' in its first year £600,000, after allowance had been made fdr cost of registration and cost of collection, and this, with the Government subsidy, would provide a net income of £1,200,000 for the provision of work, fostering of industries, and payment of subsidies. At the same time, the relief of unemployment could not alone be carried out by eight men in Wellington, and evdry citizen would have to put his shoulder to the wheel and keep it there. There could be no diminution of local effort in the meantime. Replying to a question concerning the present subsidy offer, Mr Mcßrine said he understood the money made available would be dx&v. loixted by progress payments, as in the past. Mr Finn referred to the Board’s second offer to provide a. limited amount to subsidise work organised by local committees, at the rate of £1 for £1 on wages, and he said that possibly a third proposal would be made if it became necessary. Mr Mcßrine said that a portion of the present subsidy was available for private employment. Mr Finn expressed the hope that local committees would be set up without delay, because he believed that could materially assist in overcoming the problem. >