UNEMPLOYMENT

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XX, Issue 162, 28 June 1930, Page 6

UNEMPLOYMENT

A LENGTHY DEBATE HOUSE SITS UNTIL 3 A.M IMPREST SUPPLY BILL PASSED. Wellington, June 27. Urgency was accorded the passage of the Imprest Supply Bill introduced in the House of Representatives by Governor-General’s message. Mr M. J. Savage (Lab., Auckland West) complained against the present state of unemployment. Nothing of a substantial nature had been done , to relieve the position. The whole tendency had been for the Government to throw all the responsibility on to the shoulders of local bodies. The Gov eminent seemed to bo adopting the old bad policy of relief work and poor conditions, instead of introducing productive schemes. There was authority on the Statute Bood to-day to employ men in developing land, but there seemed to be no policy for making use of such authority. Mr Savage declared that there was nothing that he could discern to lead anyone to believe that there was any forward step contemplated. This country continued to import goods that could be produced locally, thereby destroying our own market- and displacing our own employment. It would be politically fatal for any member to countenance such inactivity much longer. Sometimes he thought that if there were half a dozen men commercially minded they would do more in five minutes towards the development of an adequate policy of land settlement than the present Government would do in half a century. There was only one possible explanation of the growth of unemployment—namely, that aide by side with the employment of men there was the policy of dismissal of others. Ho was anxious to hear what the Government had to say. Mr F. Waite (Reform, Clutha) asked how long it was going to take for the land settlement cure to operate in the case of unemployment. Prob-, ably more people had lately gone off the land than the United Party bad put on it. The plight of returned soldi ers so far as unemployment was concerned was worse to-day than it had ever been before. He asked the Prime Minister whether he was prepared to go Home to attend the Imperial Conference and leave the country in such a state that returned soldiers were starving. Mr A. Harris (Reform, Waiteinata) said that unless something were dons very rapidly the unemployment situation would be a reproach upon the United Government for all time. He complained that the committee appointed to investigate the possibilities of the development of certain defined secondary industries had, for one reason or another, never been allowed to function during the recess. Here was one sphere in which something very substantial might have been done, but no such opportunity had been taken. Mr W. Nash (Lab., Hutt), making his maiden speech in the House, said it bad to be noted that the best brains in the world to-day were being devoted to devising means for displac ing human labour, and as such means were provided we found unemployment facing us to an equal extent. It was the duty of this and of other countries so faced to produce new spheres for the employment of labour. The only way we could ensure a great er consumption of products was to secure a better distribution of wealth. It was owing to the present maldistribution of wealth that there were many in this country to-day who had to go without the essentials of life. He asserted that while the slogan “produce more” had been heard for many years, the actual policy of the company promoter had been to produce only that amount which would ensure the greatest profit for the investors nnd not the greatest amount possible to enable everyone to part’dpate in the products. Mr Nash was applauded on the completion of his speech. » The debate on unemployment was continued by Mr D. G. Sullivan (Lab, Avon) and Mr W. E. Parry (Auckland Central). MR FLETCHER - . 1 ? DECLARATION. Mr J. S. Fletcher (Grey Lynn), speaking from the Independent benches, declared that he was going to fight the present or any other Government that failed to tackle unemployment. The back of tjm problem could be broken within six months if it were tackled with initiative and courage. MINISTER OF LANDS. The Hon. E. A. Ransom (Minister of Lands) said the Government did not wish to shut its eyes to the seriousness of the unemployment situation. and it was endeavouring to meet the position as adequately as possible. The Government had been endeavouring as far as possible to engage men on productive work. That applied particularly to laud development and he outlined the programme of roivl work that had resulted in land hitherto regarded as unsatisfactory being

taken up. Ho was prepared to admit that progress in the direction of lane development had not been as great as tho Government bad desired. He had mentioned road work that had been undertaken, and in addition several committees had been set up to consider breaking in blocks of Crown lands. The reports of these committees would shortly be submitted to the Lands Development Board, and he was sure that in consequence it would be possible to employ a large number of men, while the Government would probably consider itself justified in taking a certain amount of risk, and while the country would probably raise no objection to writing off a certain amount of the loss that might bo incurred in breaking in undeveloped lands, it was, however, very important that work should not be undertaken without investigation. The debate was continued by Mi W. E. Barnard (La, Napier). Mr R. McKeen (Lab., Wellington South) protested against the burden that was being placed on local bodies through unemployment, and asserted that there were many avenues through which the Government could piovide work without costing rte country a penny. Speaking after 1 a.m., the Hon W. B. Taverner said it would be time for hospital boards to protest when they were informed by.contributing local bodies that no more money was available. Str H. E. Holland, Leader of the Labour Party, suggested that tho Address in-Reply debate be confined to three or four days to enable the parties to consider tho Government’s unemployment proposals. PRIME MINISTER’S REPLY. EARLY LEGISLATION, [Per Press Association.) Wellington, June 28. Replying in the House of Representatives to the debate on unemployment, the Hon. G. W. Forbes. Prime Minister, speaking after the telegraph office closed at 2 a.m; this morning, declared that the Government was shouldering a very large share of the hurden through its £1 for £1 subsidy. It Was not night for local bodies to expect the Government to undertake the whole responsibility. The Cabinet Unemployment Committee had before it a programme which it hoped would furnish substantial relief, and the Government intended to place its legislation hearing on the subject before the House very early in the sesison. Replying to Mr. P. Fraser (Lab., Wellington Central), the Minister of Railways, Hon. W. A. Veitch, said that it was not the policy of the Government to dispense with the services of men in nny department when there was work for them to do. However, in the case of the Addington Workshops there had recently been a great deal of repair work in hand, involving a very large expenditure. Rolling stock had now been brought into a reasonable state of repair and there was not sufficient work to justify retaining the services of so many men. Mr. E. J. Howard (Lab., Christchurch South) said that some of tho men under notice of dismissal at Addington had from 10 to 15 years’ service. Those men surely had not been engaged in extra repair work. Mr. Howard suggested that the men had been dismissed because the department had “got the wind un’’ as a result of the appointment of a railway commission. Mr. Fraser said that he had not met anyone yet who was taking the commission, lt, could not in'nire confidence in anybody. The Imprest, Supply Bill providing for . appropriations amounting to

£3,275,000 was then put through all stages and'passed, LOCAL AUTHORITIES BILL. The Local Authorities Empowering (relief of unemployment) Extension Bill was introduced by GovernorGeneral’s message and was accorded urgency. Mr. Forbes stated that the bill extended for a further • twelve months’ period, during which local bodies were empowered to borrow for the relief of unemployment, and provided for the granting of subsidies by tho Government. Replying to Messrs. D. G. Sullivan (Lab., Avon) and R. McKean (Lab., Wellington South), Mr. Forbes stated that, in the event of the Government agreeing to subsidise local bodies’ expenditure on materials'as well as on labour, it would be impossible for the same percentage of money to be available to reach the pockets of the unemployed. Replying to Messrs. W. E. Barnard (Lab., Napier), and C. H. Chapman (Lab., Wellington North), the Prime Minister said that if the bill were extended to subsidising Harbour Board works, it would he difficult to see where matters would end. He thought it desirable that the bill should remain as it was at present. ADDRESS-IN-REPLY ON TUESDAY The Prime Minister replying to the leader of the Opposition, the Rt. Hon. J. G. Contes, said that it was proposed that the mover and seconder of the Address-in-Reply should speak on Tuesday, and that the debate should then be resumed on Wednesday. The House rose at 3.10 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday.