UNEMPLOYMENT AND RELIEF

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIV, 25 June 1931, Page 9

UNEMPLOYMENT AND RELIEF

(To the Editor) Sir.—Funds would flow into the relief . committee more readily if the belief : many people have that- “it is only givI ing help and money to those who won’t work and to the .spendthrifts” could he modified as it should ho. To many a man and his wife it is had enough to he out of work, but it adds a hitter feeling if they are to feel we think “it’s all their own fault.” It would be better to think “it is all our own fault” as a people, in failing to support New Zealand industries, in spencling in directions that enrich other countries only, and in other ways. This is not a time to throw stones at anyone, whether willing or not willing to work'. This is a time to help. ' I see Wellington are doing it. I see that men working •on the roads there have published thanks to the women of the localities where their work is for sending them day after day hot soup to supplement - their lunches. Alen under the No. 5 ! scheme cannot- he too well fed, their 1 wages make this impossible. And apart from this consideration must- be the 1 scrap of heartening that conies to men and women when they feel others are thinking of them with sympathy shown in soup ! Sympathy or human feeling i can even brace up the idler a hit! J The idea of ‘Tie’s done wrong and lie’s got to suffer for it” should not ' spread) into “and I’m not 'going to help him.” We’ve all done wrong more or less all our lives! So the general coni fession in my Prayer-hook implies; blitmany and many a. time in our lives have we’ been helped—maybe. not with money, maybe with both. I know I have been! I write this because I have come across a good many tales calculated to dry up the natural human sympathy and helpfulness needed at this time. Even supposing they are true, what of that? It is still the business of citizens to care for the women and children and to put work in the way of those who need it. /•—I am, etc., GRACE POX. Stoke, 25th June.

(To the Editor) Sir. —Your report on the unemployed meeting called by the Mayor recently makes interesting reading. The solicitude of His Worship and Councillor Huggins is pathetic. Why did not these gentlemen knowing the _ economic position as it is to-dav boldly inflict the 10 per cent, cut and thus liberate a further £6OO or more for relief purposes? What a futile reason they offered for their failure to realise their responsibilities. It is the opinion of the majority of the ratepayers that Council employees receive ample remuneration for services rendered, and further that at times like the present there is ample scope for economy or the amalgamation of positions. The local body indebtedness of this Dominion is something like £70,000,000 and administrative expense jis one of the curses of the country. Is ! it a fact that one Council employee re- ! ceives a substantial salary and a commission on all sales? Surely many men 1 are available who would do this work i efficiently for the salary alone, and the 1 customer could then have the benefit ol 1 the 2J, per cent, commission. The resolution of the Alayor relative t.o the 5 per cent, cut indicated a pregatliering of the heads before a decision was arj rived at, and yet when one considers I the unemployment problem at present | existing in this town, one can only assume that the resolution was the result of a violent mental travail; it could never have been the result of a conscious effort. It was indicated that the 5 per cent, cut represented a saving 1 of 13d in the rates; well, a 10 per cent, cut would be 2id. Surely if the amount released is not to assist the unemployed it would certainly assist many ratepayers in the matter of rates. Councillors i Watson and Black realised their I responsibilities to the community; the .others did not-. The Mayor and CounI cillor Huggins' have been suggested as possible Parliamentary candidates. Their lack of a. national viewpoint is not a recommendation for this particular position. Their’failure to discriminate between the man who could afford a UJ per cent, cut and those who could not is also noted for future use ’ ° ’

. (To the Editor) Sir. —I see that our worthy “City Fathers” have decided that a reduction in their staff’s salaries and wages are necessary. Just why this reduction seems necessary it is somewhat difficult to understand. „ . , , Seeing that the Council finished up the last financial year with a surplus ot approximately £I2OO, whilst the Hospital levy this year has been considerably reduced at the instigation, of the Government. These two items m themselves would allow for a reduction in rates of about which is more than the reduction which has been made. ( In view of Councillor Watson s pathetic plea that the Council had to “balance its budget” it would he interesting to know why this is necessary when no deficit has occurred. We can quite understand Mr hoi ties making a “cut” when he is faced with a deficit, hut the above facts show that a reasonable reduction in rates could have been made without the necessity of reducing wages.-I

(To the Editor)

Sir. —One aspect of the dole ami ; merely one of its many objectionable features is that it reduces the worker to the status of a pauper. He has to pay his dole, and after that lie is kept I waiting for a solid fortnight before be stands a show of a job—even two days a week at 9s per day. He is kept-liang-ins about in a way lowering to the spfrit. of any true born Briton. Before the fortnight is up he may have starved to death or have died of exposure or lie may have resorted to dishonesty, 01 he may have waylaid some respectab e citizen and hit linn over the head in t e hope of extracting something from the pockets of his victim. The incident in Halifax street last night is significant and something not too pleasant to contemplate. Till now Nelson has always | just-1 v prided herself on being a peaceful and law-abiding community. But will this pleasant state of aifans last The plight of the worker is an asnect unfortunately not lost upon a certain type of employer. Employers of this type are no friends to the State 01 tc the maintenance oi law and oidei. A local young man eagerly looking loi a job learnt that a country resident wanted a man to help on Ins farm. He instantly applied by letter lor the job, and he received, a prompt reply to the effect that the job was there all light, that the wages (with keep) wasi 15s 1 per week, and that when the GovcinIment had readjusted its unemployed 1 scheme (which had lapsed) the position would be worth more. Hie job would ;at all events last 10 weeks, and the 1 farmer intimated that he would do his best” for the applicant, who showed , h-ltor and asked my advice as to what he had better do. “Take it by all means,” 1 advised; “15s is not vciy i much it is true, but far better than

nothing, and for 10 weeks you will have a home, anyhow,” lie thought my advice was good. The applicant borrowed the train and service car fare to take him to his destination and set out with a good heart and high hopes. Arriving on the farm at midday he met the farmer, who was pleased with his able-bod-ied appearance, and things appeared to be going on quite alright till the fanner casually observed, “Of course you understand that the wages are 10s aweek.” “But,” said the applicant, “you stated very plainly that the wages would he 15s for a start." "I know I did,” replied the boss, “but I put in the 15s merely as a matter of form because I knew that if I said 10s you would perhaps have never put in an appearance at all. And now I can tell you what you can do,” he continued, “you can either accept the 10s a week or take the next train hack to the city, whichever you like.” No offer was made of tile return fare. Indeed, I believe this was bluntly refused. Fortunately for this young man (who was completely stranded' many miles from home) lie got a lift on a lorry which happened to be passing. Very much to my surprise 1 met him soon after he reached Nelson the following day. This is an absolutely true statement and any employer who can act- as this employer acted—at a time such as this —is doing a very wrong and dangerous thing.—-I am, etc., OBSERVER. Nelson, 24th June.

“GET ON THE LAND AND PRODUCE”

(To the Editon Sir, —In reviewing the correspondence that has’followed my letter of the 18th inst., I am satisfied that far too much sentiment and not enough practicability has been introduced. 1 should advise “World Wide,” when approaching such a question as unemployment, not to introduce Christianity. The influence of Christianity, in nearly two thousand years, lias utterly failed to provide a solution to these problems. Facts, not impossible ideals, must decide such issues. Consequently, I am not concerned with whether “World Wide” can reconcile my attitude with a “Christian ideal” or not. “World Wide” admits that it is the madness of the world that has caused such havoc-. Exactly; That madness must be corrected; and, in this, Christian methods have failed. “World Wide” says that human nature is such that 99 men out of 100 will respond to fair treatment. This is contrary to fact and experience. During the last, say, twenty years, the workers have had concessions and advantages never before known, with the result that “Do as little as you can for as much 'as you can get” lias become their motto. Tlie some correspondent, hv his suggestion that Christianity provides rfjom for failures, completely overrides the law of tiie survival of the fittest —a law which the whole of Nature upholds. “Don’t Shuffle” seems to he anxious to explain to your readers how I have “blithered,” but he makes not a single suggestion himself. “Seven Bar,” while admitting that extravagance is largely responsible for the present state of unemployment, puts forward the most extravagant suggestion yet made. He admits that the present levy of thirty shillings a year has proved inadequate; but he is evidently not far-seeing enough to realise that, before long, even his suggested one shilling ill the pound on all wages would also he inadequate, so that we might just as well hand over our bank hooks. Such a ruinous scheme would, very soon, remove every incentive on the part of the community to strive.

I should like to ask these many philanthropists, after they have given all that they have to the poor, after the levy has evaporated and the shilling in the pound touch lias increased until the thrifty have been compelled to disgorge all that they have striven for—• what then?

Let our philanthropic friends stand on the roadside at Taliuna, on a fine Sunday morning, and watch the number of joy-riders in their mostly hirepurchase motor cars and motor cycles; let them stand at the doors of the picture theatres night after night; or watch the class of persons who will crowd the wrestling, ring to-night; let them visit any of the large restaurants in our big centres and watch the hundreds of men and women—mostly women—drinking, eating and grinning. Then, in the face of this idle extravagance, can they reasonably expect the thrifty to subscribe to its continuance? The* suggestion at the public meeting that the mudflat should be reclaimed as a reproductive work is rather “off colour.” Just when would this scheme become reproductive ? At the rate that most of the relief workers go, I should say that the joli would he completed in the year 2999. But we want something that will show a quicker return; this is’not the time to provide for posterity. Dr. Washbourn’s suggestion that huts he brought into operation is ■worthy of notice; hut what about tlie hygienic point of view? If those unemployed are single, their place is out of town; if-they are married and have families, then overcrowding would result. No doubt this scheme would be the quickest possible method of bringing down rents. As it is, the landlords have had a pretty thin time lately. To provide huts for the unemployed, almost rent free, with starvation not in sight, would be about the quickest way imaginable to breed a slum area.

My contention is, Air Editor, that these people must he got out of the towns and on to the land somehow. Councillor Page stated that farmers were not in a position to employ hands just now. He should have said that farmers were not in a position to pay tlie wages demanded by 7 many of the unemployed. Mr Carr’s motion was the only practical solution to this great problem: namely, get on to tlie land and produce! And this is just the thing that most of the unemployed have no intention of doing. So long as relief is forthcoming, by way of levies and subscriptions, so long will the unemployed increase. New Zealand has the land: why not work it and produce? This talk of over-production is all balderdash. New Zealand lias underproduced to the tune of approximately 7 two hundred and seventy million pounds. The people of this country have lived too long on borrowed money. They are now the spoiled children of fashion and luxury 7 , the (iresent crisis was inevitable. If some scheme is not introduced, quick and lively to compel the • unemployed to get on ’to the land and produce for all they are worth, then it will, very soon, be God Help God’s own country! I am, etc., LES. SPORT. Nelson, 24th June.