TO-DAY’S PROBLEM

Northern Advocate, 19 July 1935, Page 5

TO-DAY’S PROBLEM

UNEMPLOYMENT MR BROMLEYS REVIEW favourable results of N.Z. POLICY. BUT SOME CHANGE NEEDED. “Any known weakness notwithstanding, the present legislation as a measure designed to deal with the relief of distress arising from seasonal and short-term employment has met the emergency arising from the depression over a wide field, with results comparing more than favourably with any known administration. The measure of relief granted, admitted to be totally inadequate in itself to meet all requirements of the recipients, is on a higher basis than that of any other known unemployment relief administration. No increase in the. national indebtedness has been involved; administration costs have- been kept extremely low; and the national expenditure has to a great extent been recovered by the creation of national and public body assets.” These remarks were made by Mr W. Bromley, deputy-chairman of the Unemployment; Board in a lengthy review of the unemployment pi before members of the Dannevirke Rc + arV Club. Different From 1929. . Mr Bromley went on to say that the problem differed widely from that of 1929. It had changed from a seasonal problem to one of chronic large scale unemployment. At the same time New Zealand had emerged from a position as exporters privileged to work on the assumption that England was a bottomless market (for the Dominion’s produce at profitable prices to apposition where the market was being restricted, and where export prices barely met production costs. The difficulty had been accentuated however, by the introduction of machinery to displace labour. Mr Bromley quoted the instance of the dairy industry where milking machines to take the place of farm labour were being installed at the rate of over 1,000 plants per annum. The practice had not been confined to the farm but was in evidence everywhere. While that policy went on the country had at the end of last month 53,241 adult male’s wholly - or partially dependent on the unemployment fund.

During the past four years that* group had fluctuated between 44,000 and 75,246. The men wholly dependent On the intermittent work scheme —No. 5 or sustenance payments—had fluctuated between 31,884 and 45,759. What Result? Mr Bromley said that to decide whether the legislative machinery was adequate depended on the results desired. Having regard to the limitations placed on the board and for the accepted policy that the field of industry should be left to private enterprise, it might be correctly concluded that, notwithstanding the liberal subsidies provided from the fund for the encouragement of industrial development, private enterprise still failed to organise employment for thousands of the workless. There were many legacies of the depression in the form of industrial problems that had not, as yet, been realised by the man in the street. How many, he asked, would have realised that as a result of the recent improved activity in industry, there was today the spectacle of overtime being worked, because skilled labour was not available, and that in spite of the large numbers of unemployed. That position was not perhaps at its worst as yet.

The board had already, in one or two cases, provided subsidies for the training of adults, but that could only be done in certain industries not gov- 1 erned by awards. The board had also ' provided subsidies for short periods : where a tradesman has been for more than two years from his trade —a sort 1 of “getting fit” subsidy. j Another problem was that many unemployed had accumulated liabilities so great that when offered a job at standard wages it was not by any means an unmixed blessing. Many instances had been experienced of men asking to be excused from accepting a full-time job, explaining that, with the pressure for repayment of debts that came with regular employment, they would be worse off than on relief pay New Orientation Needed. The time was opportune for a new j orientation of the problem of unemployment. The legislation should be j re-designed to place greater emphasis j on employment and less on the relief j side of unemployment. It must be [ designed for long range planning. The j only healthy recovery would be in the direction of greater self-sufficiency brought about by the creation of new secondary industries, improving the balance between primary and secon- j dary industries. I It would seem safe to assume that 1 I there had been a general expectation that the board, with a fund of £4,500.000 annually at its disposal, should in some way —the details never being suggested—provide full-time employment at standard wages for all the unemployed. The board itself had no legislative authority to become an employer of labour. But if it was insist- ! ed that the State should accept the full responsibility for finding suitable standard employment for all those not

required in the industries controlled by private enterprise the objections previously held against the State’s incursion into industry must be withdrawn. Further, if it was felt that for New Zealand the great need was a development of industry policy, and because of the attendant risk from the point of view of the investor nothing happened, he could see that the eventual position would be, the question, not of whether the State should enter industry, but of whether the luxury could be afforded of keeping the State out of industry and leaving the field to private enterprise. Only Alternative. • The only alternative was to sustain them by means of a re-distrfoution of existing incomes—-that was what relief amounted to. Nor was it wise to assume that the genuine involuntary unemployed worker would for ever be satisfied with a standard of living less than that enjoyed by those in employment. It was sometimes stated rather disparagingly that the board existed 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 of a system we all appear afraid to change? It was time to call a halt in complaining because the board could not make a 5-horse-power engine to do a j job requiring a 20-hoi’se-power engine. It always appeared to him that New I Zealand was blessed with unique op- | portunitics. The potential field for ! new industrial development was wider j than in most other countries. With j some stability in export prices, even at ! the lower level now experienced, it 1 would no doubt encourage some extension of the Public Works policy, affording some measure of relief. Let ■the occasion be one for greater cooperation and still further improve- | ments in the relief measures might be i possible, Mr Bromley concluded.