UNEMPLOYED PROBLEM.
BILL IN THE COMMONS.
THE MEASURE DEFEATED
BUMBLE OF SOCIALISM
By Telegraph.— Association.—Copyright.
(Received March 15, 5.38 p.m.)
London 7 , March 14. In the House of Commons, Mr. J. Ilavelock Wilson (Labour member for Middlesbrough) moved the second reading of the Unemployed Workmen Bill. Much public interest was displayed. Mr. Wilson, explaining the root principle of the Bill, said the problem of the unemployed must be regarded as a national matter. Mr. Ramsay Mac Donald, in seconding the motion, claimed that the measure was only an extension of the legislation of 1905, which gave unemployed the hope of State employment. It was a mistake for Liberals to fancy that they heard the rumble of the tumbril of socialism. No fateful results would follow this labour demand, and the cost would not exceed that of one Dreadnought annually. MORE HARM THAN GOOD. Mr. F. Maddison (Radical) moved an amendment affirming that the Bill would throw out of work more than it would assist, arid would destroy the. power of organised labour. lie censured the socialists for telling the people that there was a way by which everybody could get work, by advocating ruinous and disastrous land schemes.' Mr. A. V. Grayson (socialist member for the .Colne Valley Division of Yorkshire) said that if the Government were unable to solve the problem of unemployment, they ought to resign. Money was needed, and it could be obtained by bursting the bags of the wealthy, which were filled with unearned increment. " DELUSION AND A SNARE." Mr. John Burns (President of the Local Government Board), in a vigorous and argumentative speech, repudiated the charge that nothing had been done for the poor. The cry was everywhere raised that the Government was threatening the monopolies of the rich, and exalting fir.tian and corduroy at the expense of the tall hat and frock coat. No othe}- country would have spent so much; in the relief of the poor, nor would the people have interested themselves- ;so wholeheartedly to assist the indigent, '■ ileferring to the failure of the farm colonies, ire stated that Hollesley Bay involved a loss of £22,000 a year, and gave some striking illustrations of the unsatisfactory results of such methods of assisting the unemployed. Few local authorities desired the powers the Bill conferred, and he was confident that such legislation would prove a delusion and a snare. STATE CONTROL. ' Mr. Asquith declared that the acceptance of the main principle of the Bill would be more prejudicial to the workers than any other class, and would vastly aggravate unemployment, and ultimately necesssitate complete State control of the whole machinery of production. The Bill was rejected by 265 to 116, and the amendment carried by 241 to 95. There was much cross voting. The majority against the Bill composed 195 Ministerialists and 70 Unionists. The minority included. 41 Labourites, 20 Nationalists, two Unionists, and a number of Radicals. The South Australian Premier (Mr. T. Price) attended the debate. 9 Mr. J. Havelock Wilson's Unemployed i Bill provided, among other things, that re- ! gistered unemployed and their ' dependents i shall be maintained at the public expense, i
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19080316.2.37
Bibliographic details
New Zealand Herald, Volume XLV, Issue 13699, 16 March 1908, Page 5
Word Count
522UNEMPLOYED PROBLEM. New Zealand Herald, Volume XLV, Issue 13699, 16 March 1908, Page 5
Using This Item
NZME is the copyright owner for the New Zealand Herald. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence . This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of NZME. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Acknowledgements
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Auckland Libraries and NZME.