PARLIAMENT

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XVII, 29 September 1927, Page 6

PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES MORE ABOUT UNEMPLOYMENT. GOVERNMENT’S EFFORTS CRITICISED. Wellington, Sept. 28. The House of Representatives went into Committee of Supply this afternoon to consider the Imprest Supply Bill No. 4. Mr W. E. Parry, (Auckland Central), who, in the absence of Mr H. E. Holland and Mr M. J. Savage, was leading the Opposition, raised the question of immigration and unemployment. He traced the history of unemployment during the past winter, commending the work done by city councils to provide relief without re duction of wages, and blaming the Government for displaying little interest in the welfare of the unemployed, with the result that men would not register at the labour bureau, and consequently the Government was ignorant of the real number of unemployed in the Dominion. It was not the duty of the Opposition to provide a policy for the Government, but the problem could be solved if tackled in a proper manner.

Sir John Luke (Wellington North) said the industrial position was improving so rapidly in Britain that there was little fear of over migration from the Mother Country. What we should do was not to attack the Government. but to get together and do something practical for the relief of our own people. Sir Joseph Ward (Invercargill) said he wished to support Mr Parry in what lie said with regard to unemployment The position was very serious in Auckland city, where many people were being kept alive by charity. Such should not be. The Government should rise to the occasion. They should pick out some line of railway in each inland and set 10,000 to 20,000 people th work. They would get the return later on, but in the meantime they would solve the unemployed problem. Mr J. A. Nash (Palmerston) said Sir Joseph Ward had charged the Government with excessive borrowing, but now he suggested spending huge sum. l on railway lines. People in want were entitled to sympathy, but many who talked loudly about unemployment were, perhaps, not doing all they might to relieve cases of hardship.

JUST A REPETITION. The Hon. G. J. Anderson, Minister of Labour, said all the furious sound** which had come from the Opposition benches were only a repetition of whai they heard on Friday last. He had never said the labour bureau figures repre* sented the total unemployed in New Zealand, but those figures constituted a barometer. By doubling the figure one probably arrived at something like •he actual number of unemployed. From information gathered in all reliable sources, the Minister found there were 1600 unemployed in Auckland Many men on relief work had left of their own accord. He had received letters from men all over New Zealand thanking him for what the Governmen* had done.

Mr R. McKeen (Wellington South) could not see that the present distress and unemployment should be sufficient excuse for the Government breaking awards had been in operation for years. Yet this was what was being done.

The Hon. A. D. McLeod quoted figures to show the number of men who had been employed in the Auckland nrevincr. 9r .d declared that the Government had just as much sympathy for these men as the Labour member l had. I’hey had done a great deal and were still doing their best to meet the emergency.

Mr J. A. Lee (Auckland East) said it was. difficult to see what was to be come of the unemployed, since the Ministers displayed so little interest in them. Mr D. G. Sullivan (Avon) said there

’••ni’lrl bp 500 *"«’7 m n ry|*dnyp'i ?r Christchurch to-night, and he wanted to know what the Government wa? ing to do about it.

Mr. G. W. Forbes (Hurunui) said the Government's reputation for carrying on the business of the country in ? businesslike way had not at all been enhanced by the manner in which they had handled this unemployed problem. Mr E. J. Howard (Christchurch South), said New Zealand was suffering from unemployment more than any other country, because we had bad administration of our own country to put un with. The Labour party had told the Government in 1921 that unless they put their house in order they wengoing to create a permanent unemployment problem, and now they hacl the satisfaction, if such it could be called, of seeing their prediction come true. DUE TO SEVERAL CAUSES. The Hon. 0. J. Hawken said it was many years since any Government in New Zealand had provided so much money for relief work for unemployed and yet the Government was blamed for doing nothing. Unemployment was due to several causes. The farm ers had found that owing to th’ low prices for produce, they had not been able to pay the rate of wages ruling in the towns, and so men had drifted :ntn. the towns. They were in turn rendered idle by the industrial depression and so in turn they became unemployed. They were not manual worker* and could not do pick and shovel work, as the unemployed in the old days al most always were. The Government might find employment for pick and shovel men, but they could not possibly find work for mechanics and others who were not able to take up any cla.s of work offering. Fixed wages were to the same extent responsible for un employment, because when men couid not earn a given rate of wages employers could not afford to pay them and second rate men had no chance of securing employment. He did not favour low wages or the lowering of wages, but our wages system was 100 cast iron to permit of second rale men being employed. The employer couh not afford to pay them full wages, and they were simply told there was no work for them. * Mr J. McCombs (Lyttelton) declared that the theme underlying the Minister's speech was the reduction of wages, and that was at the back of the Government policy also, as bad been declared over and over again. Mr J. Mason (Napier) a.-ked whai the Labour party had ever done to solve the unemployed problem in New Zealand. They were always behind the men who were stirring up strife and stopping industry and curtailing the output of our primary industries.

The Hon. W. Downie Stewart said that if the Labour party was going to blame the Government for unemployment, then they should explain why Labour Governments in Australia were faced with even more serious unemployment than was the case in New Zealand. The Imprest Supply Bill No. 4, appropriating the sum of £1,766,000, was then put through all stages ami parsed. MACHINERY AMENDMENT. The House then went into committee on the Inspection of Machinety Amendment Bill. Mr W. E. Parry (Auckland Central) contended that, while the policy of the bill was rightly safety first, so far as private employers were concerned, these necessary precautions did not apply to the Crown, which was a most improper evasion. The Minister, in reply, said he did not know enough to say why the Crown was consistently exempted from responsibility of this kind, but it was so, and there must be some reason L>- it. He would make inquiries and would make a statement later.

The first clause was then passed, progress was reported and the House rose at 1050 p.m. till 2.30 p.m. to-morrow.