NEW ORIENTATION

Manawatu Standard, Volume LV, Issue 197, 19 July 1935, Page 2

NEW ORIENTATION

UNEMPLOYED LEGISLATION. LONG RANGE PLANNING. “The time is opportune for a new orientation of the problem of unemployment. Tho legislation should be re-designed to place greater emphasis on employment and less on the relief side of unemployment. It must bo designed for long range planning. The only healthy recovery would be in the direction of greater self-sufficiency brought about by tho creation of new secondary industries, improving the balance between our primary and secondary industries.” This statement was made by Mr W. Bromley, deputy-chairman of the Unemployment Board, when addressing the Dannevirke Rotary Club to-day. Mr Bromley continued': “Here is tho rub. Whose responsibility is it to start new industries? If one may take a line on the criticism that has boon levelled at the Unemployment Board during the past four years, it would seem safe to assume that there has been a general expectation that the board, with a fund of £4,500,009 annually at its disposal, should in some way—the details never being suggested—provide full-time employment at standard wages for all the unemployed. It is clear that the board itself has no legislative authority to becomo an employer of labour. If you must insist, however, that tho State should accept the full responsibility for finding suitable standard employment for all those not required in the industries controlled by private enterprise—by yourselves—you will need to give thought to the question of withdrawing all of the objections you have .previously held against the State’s incursion into industry. Further, if we are convinced that for New Zealand the great need is a development of industry policy, and because of the attendant risk from tho point of view of the investor nothing happens, I can see us reaching tho position, and more quickly than you might think, where it will become a live question, not of whether the State should enter into industry, but of whether we, as citizens, can afford the luxury of keeping tho State out of industry and leaving the field to private enterprise. To illustrate my reasons for making this point, let me assume that the State, as a means of providing employment, started some entirely new industry. “I am refraining from suggesting any particular industry; but it could be hydrogenation of coal, steel, asbestos, rubber tyres, or any other industry entirely new to New Zealand. I am also avoiding any discussion of the question as to whether tho State could successfully run an industry. 1 am more concerned with illustrating the national loss occasioned by large scale unemployment of our fit men. If such an industry provided employment for 500 males between the ages of 20 and 65 at an average weekly wage of I £4, and calculated on the same basis of profit and loss as adopted by private enterprise the industry made an annual loss of £20.000, it would still mean a substantial saving to the State. Enlarging further for the purpose of clarity—the direct annual cost to the State for relief aid to unemployed to-day is averaging 25s per week per man, and, whilst deemed to he hopelessly inadequate, means £32,500 for a year for each 500 unemployed. not counting administration costs. Were these men in employment averaging £4 per week, thev would contribute to the fund for relief of unemployment £4325 per annum. This amount, added to the cost of relief, brings the direct national annual cost to £36,825 for each 500 men, measured in contrast with employment at an average wage of £4 per week. This loss is yours and mine. It is no use asking what the Unemployment Board is going to do about it. It is no use either to ask the Government what it is going to do about it. A\ hat are you going to do about it? When lifting your hand in support of a resolution calling upon tho Government or the board to immediately provide .full-time emplovment for the workless, it would be useful to ask yourselves how you would react to an announcement by the Government that it was about to start an intensive State industrial development scheme. Or, to begin with, ask yourcelves how you have reacted in the past to the plan of subsidising private industry as adopted by the Unemployment Board. “That there is scope for development of new industries and additions to existing industries is unlikely to be seriously questioned. That industries based on the investment of private capital wiil not be established except m confident anticipation of a profit on the capital invested is equally sure, the board has tho power and the will to assist private enterprise with new mdustries by way of subsidies, gran s or loans. The results from this policy have so far been disappointing. Without expansion of our secondary industries, we shall not reduce our unemployment figures below 30,000. the only alternative to making it possible for as many of this number as may be willing and able to work to earn their living by producing those tilings that we need, but at present buy from overseas and often from countries that do not ’reciprocate by purchasing our products is to sustain them by means ot a re-distribution of existing incomes—that is what our relief amounts to. Nor is it wise to assume that the genuine involuntary unemployed worker will for ever be satisfied with a standard ot living less than that enjoyed by those in employment. The present legislation does not give powers to the board to itself engage in the employment of men. In the last analysis the board for its success in getting men back into employment is dependent on the captains of our industry—you men ho c to-dav. If we are not succeeding, the failure is as much yours as it is ours. It is sometimes stated rather disparagingly that the Unemployment Board oxTsts only to take the blame for the Government. Would it not be nearer the truth to say that the Government and the board are carrying the blame for the inevitable results ot a system we all appear afraid to change. It is time to call a halt in complaining because the Unemployment Boaid cannot make a 5-horso jiower engine do a job requiring- a 20-horse power engine If there is delay in reaching the top of tho hill— overlooking the rich vallev of prosperity, and more equa opportunity for all-remember we shall get there quicker if wo all pull the same way. “It is certain that before very long as a nation, and in common with other nations, we shall have to do some real planning for a better distribution of employment. It always appears to me that New Zealand is blessed with uniciuo opportunities. The potential held for new industrial development is wider than in most other„countries, despite our long distance irom the hub of the universe. With some stability in our export prices, even at the lower level now experienced, it would no doubt, encourage some extension of the public works policy, affording some measure of relief. Let the occasion be one for greater co-operation and still further improvements in the relief measures may be possible 3he main problem, though, of transferring hack to gainful employment all those unem-^

ployed able and willing to work, involves more revolutionary changes. It is to promote thought upon those lines that made me determine upon this typo of an address to-day. I ieel that some of the suggestions J have put forward, striking as they do against the roots of principles that have been long regarded as sacred, will not be readily accepted. My mind goes involuntarily to the immortalised story of the young man who, thinking in terms of long range planning, asked the question of the Great Teacher, ‘What shall I do to be saved ?’ It was not that he doubted the advice that caused him to turn sorrowfully away.”