THE UNEMPLOYMENT POLICY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20251, 10 May 1929, Page 10

THE UNEMPLOYMENT POLICY.

One of the earliest pronouncements made by Sir Joseph Ward as Prime Minister, in acknowledging the difficulty of dealing with unemployment, was that the rate of wages on Government relief works would be raised to "draw the unemployed out of the cities." "Anyone with normal judgment must realise," he then declared, that if the higher rate were applied to the towns and cities "married men working in the country would throw up their work there and go into the cities." So far from the position having been remedied during the last five months, Sir Joseph Ward himself confessed to a Labour deputation in Wellington last week that "it was utterly impossible for him to say where the unemployment difficulty was going to end." All lie could propose to that deputation was that he would appeal to the Mayor of Wellington to accept the Government's offer of a subsidy of £25,000 for relief works in the city. It was, however, subsequently revealed that the offer had been previously accepted and arrangements made by the council for the; complementary finance. Hence a further offer of £20,000 was made and this also has been accepted by the council. Official statistics of registrations at the labour bureaux show that in spite of the placing of many men in employment, on Government and local body works and elsewhere, the number of unsatisfied applications has persistently increased to a total of 3211, which is 677 more than a year ago, and 1423 more than on December 10. The suggestion has already been made that it is not only the genuine "unemployed" that resort to the bureaux, but to a large extent men who have been induced to register by the lavish promises made by the Government of its ability to absorb many thousands of workers. A striking illustration of this tendency is afforded by the latest returns. The Government's decision in regard to the route of the Gisborne-Napier railway was announced on March 4, and active operations quickly followed. In the four weeks ended April 15, no fewer than 347 men applied for work in Gisborne, as compared with 55 in the corresponding period of last year, and since only ten were employed by the Government, there was a phenomenal increase in the district's list of "unemployed." Similarly, at Napier, the registrations jumped from 40 to 180, of whom 12 were engaged for public works. The Gisborne experience offered an exceptional opportunity for investigating the antecedents of the applicants, to discover how many of them were actually unemployed and how many leaving other occupations to secure the advantages of State employment. Until some check is placed upon the migration of "unemployed" men and some distinction made between the genuine unemployed and normally casual labour, the Government will not only Fnsil to define the character of the unemployment problem, but it will find it "utterly impossible" to bring it to an end.

HOUKS OF PARLIAMENT, The movement to limit the hours of Parliament is evidently being pressed. Though the Select Committee discussing the subject has announced nothing, forecasts of its report are being offered, and textually they pass the test of credibility. To those not acquainted with the rather complex workings of the legislative machine it may seem a simple thing to specify certain hours within which its work must be done. Even a superficial knowledge of the Standing Orders—which, if not exactly like the laws of the Medes and Persians, are not easily amended —shows it to be less simple than it appears To put the position in its most elementary form, when the course of debate moves more slowly than the hands of the clock it is quite easy to have the motion adjourned to another sitting day. It is not so easy to find an opportunity for its resumption, especially when the order paper is crowded, or to have it carried to an end as if there had been no interruption. Many discussions gain a now lease of life after the question has been left to rest for a while. In the forecast of what will be recommended, published to-day, it is suggested that speeches in the Address-in-Reply debate will perhaps be limited to half an hour, instead of a full hour being allowed as at present. Again, those who know how Parliament works will recognise .this as a very small move toward shortening proceedings. What, for instance, will be done, or can be done, about committee proceedings? It is in committee that delay can most easily be engineered. When a minority desires to use the forms of the House to contest a measure obnoxious to its constituent members, tho committee stage offers the opportunity. Yet to limit the right to discuss clauses and to move amendments might involve cutting deeply into the privileges the private member enjoys. Apart from time expended over actual legislative proposals and really contentious questions, there is much waste of it on trifling issues. Here is a direction in which there could be a saving without the individual member being deprived of any very weighty privileges. It could be achieved best by self-discipline, or by party discipline. These are points which arise outside any question of a formal closure. It would bo advanced very reluctantly, but there are many students of Parliamentary procedure who believe hours cannot be effectively regulated without a closure device for the limitation of debate.