THE H.B. TRIBUNE SATURDAY, JUNE 22, 1935 THE UNEMPLOYMENT BOARD.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXV, Issue 160, 22 June 1935, Page 4

THE H.B. TRIBUNE SATURDAY, JUNE 22, 1935 THE UNEMPLOYMENT BOARD.

The announcement by the Wellington City Council that after the end of next month it will not further co-operate with the Unemployment Board on the basis of what is known as the No. 5 scheme lias brought matters to something like a crisis in that area. The resolution that was passed was to the effect “that as from that date relief works under the scheme should cease in Wellington and that the Council should urge upon the Government an increase of 10/- weekly in the sustenance rate.” The reply of the Board is that the limitations both of their statutory functions and, still more important, of the funds at their command preclude it from entertaining this proposal. This No. 5 scheme is one that has met witli but very scant acceptance anywhere, and the Board itself is by no means enamoured of it. Unfortunately, however, it is one dictated by the financial limitations of the position and one, too, for which no general substitute lias been submitted that has regard for those limitations. The Wellington City Council, at any rate, had none to offer, its only alternative being an appeal to the Government.

We fancy that those who have read dispassionately the statements issued first by Mr. Bromley, as deputy-chairman, and then by the Minister of Employment (the Hon. S. G. Smith), as chairman of the Board will agree that the position is one in which the Board as such is entitled to a good deal of sympathy that is not forthcoming. Its hands, as has been said, are held, firstly, within the bounds of the authority conferred upon it by the legislation creating it and, secondly, within the limits of the financial resources placed at its disposal. In the first place it does not come within the scope of the Board’s functions to create employment, it can only encourage others to do so. In the second place, it must in the application of its limited resources have due regard for all of the many thousands who have claims upon them. Beyond this, the Board must always bear in mind that one of its chief objects must be to assist to the gradual reabsorption of the unemployed into customary and, as far as possible, permanent avenues of employment. In fact, that is the ultimate aim that is most important of all.

The main difficulty is, of course, in dealing with the cases of married men with households to maintain. As the Minister points out, even if the Government wore to enter upon some set scheme of public works, these must almost necessarily be of a developmental character conducted at a distance from the towns where the married men reside, so entailing their being sent into camp. To lids there' has always been some verynatural strenuous objection. The same, though in a minor degree, applies to work which many of the rural local bodies might provide. There seems every good reason, therefore, why municipal authorities, and especially those of the large? centres of popula-

tion, should co-operate as cordially as possible with the Unemployment Board in its endeavours to make the funds at its command cover all those in need of assistance and at the same time help to accomplish some useful purpose. Both Mr. Smith and Mr. Bromley very justifiably stress this point, showing clearly that it was contemplated from the outset that “the promotion of work should come by the co-operation of the Board with local bodies and employers of labour generally.” No one is going to say that the Board has not laid itself open to criticism—that was almost inevitable under the novelty and intricacy of the problem with which it had to deal. But we think that those who read carefully what the Minister and the deputy-chairman have had to say will see that a good deal of the criticism, at any rate of its later activities, is not altogether warranted.