Grey River Argus SATURDAY, MAY 2nd, 1931. PLIGHT OF THE POOREST.

Grey River Argus, 2 May 1931, Page 4

Grey River Argus SATURDAY, MAY 2nd, 1931. PLIGHT OF THE POOREST.

Poverty in extent, if not also in degree, is probably going to prove greater in New Zealand this winter than ever before in its history. I Each district will doubtless act [upon the dictum that charity begins at home. The stranger is therefore assured everywhere of I the cold shoulder. Surely this [prospect is enough to disturb the self satisfaction of those people who recently welcomed the “no (Work, no sustenance” decree with j such equanimity - ? The Government has pronouneed that none [shall lack food or shelter, but. | even locally the question is no [longer as to whether any may be (thus lacking, but whether it were prudent to offer the one or the other to the stranger, lest it might only attract here more of his kind. If, however, that is the general attitude, it certainly points to the need for some relaxation of the I refusal of the .State to face the I caWe of the poorest class in the I land, who have nowhere even to j lay their heads. It would be an uncharitable view of those who . take the open road instead of hanging about the eity with the hope of finding something to do ' were they generally to be judged I work-shy. The unemployment statistics show unquestionably . that many thousands who simply 1 cannot get jobs now must have I been working some little time ago. If the homeless section of the unemployed are to be treated everywhere as outcasts, can anybody honestly defend the Government’s attitude in refusing sustenance to the workers? The principle that, each locality shall un- ’ dertake the responsibility of look ing after needy residents withir |its own limits is certainly a reasI onable one, but. whose is the reI sponsibility for the migratory poor? It is obviously that of the I State. This is a matter to which i attention has in Parliament been i drawn by the Labour Party, but I the other parties took the stand ' that the session was not called for i anything of the kind. In his final speech of the session, it was preI cisely this problem of the extremity of poverty upon which the Leader of the Labour Party dwelt, I when he contrasted the care tak- ' en to safeguard the interests of the wealthy with the carelessness | exhibited towards the welfare of I those who are in the greatest pov--1 erty. To say that, the workers should submit to a loss of all the conditions and wage rates they I have struggled through the years ! to obtain rather than interrupt work is not the counsel called for at this time any more than at J any other time. It cannot by any 5 stretch of imagination be said that unwillingness to work is responsible for the unemployment prevalent throughout the land. It might, however, be said that an unwillingness to give work upon fair terms is the cause of much unemployment. The worst factor jof the present economic complex in New Zealand as elsewhere is a psychological one. The prevailing passion is one of fear, and it invades even the sphere of benevolence, which is one explanation of the anxiety expressed lest, the poorest of the poor should be < treated as well as those not so badly off. If the distress in any locality during the winter should become so severe as to render the provision of shelter necessary, it is to be hoped that the stranger will not be left out in the cold merely because of being a stranger. The helping hand is not going to beggar any community. Certainly it is desirable that, the Government should not be allowed to shirk the responsibility of the

State, and public- men, whose ■ judgment in this matter should be the safest guide in eaeh district, E ought to act unitedly in pointing c out the national obligation to ful-iJ fil such responsibility. But in the) event of there being- no more re- B spouse than so far has been shown, | c it would be no credit to any com- 1 rnunity who treated the stranger as a pariah, but a negation of hos- j pitedity and the repudiation of the t virtue of charity. < - :