UNEMPLOYMENT BILL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21153, 9 April 1932, Page 13

UNEMPLOYMENT BILL.

MEASURE PASSES HOUSE. (ft EFFORTS FOR EXEMPTION. LABOUR AMENDMENTS LOST. AN ALL-NIGHT SITTING. [BY TELEGRAPH. —PRESS ASSOCIATION.] WELLINGTON, Friday. The Unemployment Amendment Bill was passed in the House of Representatives at 7.30 this morning, after an all-night sitting. Labour and Independent members moved an array of amendments, all of which were rejected. The closure was applied only once and in most cases the clauses and amendments went to division after comparatively brief discussion. After about four hours' discussion OB the short title, the closure was applied at 3.5 a.m. by 44 votes to 23 and the clause was adopted on the voices. Mr. W. E, Barnard (Labour —Napier) moved to make manadatory, instead of permissive, the provision whereby unemployed persons settled on land, who are unable to provide adequate sustenance for themselves and families, can receive sustenance allowances out of the Unemployment Fund. This was defeated by 44 votes to 22 and the clause was adopted unamended. Withdrawal of Subsidy. The House agreed to minor amendments submitted by the Minister in charge of Unemployment, the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates, to two other clauses. When the clause was reached repealing the provisions for the payment, of the subsidy from the Consolidated Fund to the Unemployment Fund, Mr. P. Fraser (Labour —Wellington CentralJ expressed the opinion it would be a mistake to withdraw the present right, especially as the Government did not know what it would be faced with during the coming winter. Mr. Coates said th# Consolidated Fund could not stand the strain of a subsidy on the Is in the pound tax. The Cabinet had power, if necessary, to draw on the Consolidated Fund and obtain Parliamentary sanction. Subsequently, the clause was challenged by Labour and retained by 42 votes to 23. The provision for an increase in the rate of the unemployment charge on wages, salaries and other income to Is in the pound was discussed at length. Mr. Fra?er moved that consideration of the clause be postponed to enable the Government to substitute a graduated for a flat rate tax. He said he did not think newsboys and those earning a like amount should be asked to contribute to the Unemployment Fund. Mr. R. A. Wright (Government —Wellington Suburbs) said it was unreasonable to ask people earning £2 a week or less to pay a shilling in the pound in unemployment taxation. The amendment was a reasonable one. Payment by Youths. Mr. Barnard asked what justification there was for imposing a tax on youths for whom the board could not find work. He mentioned also similar cases of girls and women. Mr. C. H. Clinkard (Government — Rotorua) asked the Minister to consider relieving from payment of the tax those receiving less than £1 a week. Mr. R. Semple (Labour —Wellington East) also urged there should be a graduated instead of a flat rate tax. Mr. Fraser's motion was defeated by 35 votes to 26. Mr. C. A. Wilkinson (Independent— Egmont) moved to exempt from the payment of the tax those receiving less than £1 a week. He said the impost would be utterly unfair and he was astonished to find that newsboys were to be taxed. Mr. Coates said "if they exempted married men receiving below £2 a week and single men earning 25s a week, they would lose £400,000 per annum. He agreed they should not tax schoolboys and said ho was prepared to consider this aspect. The Unemployment Board had power to make exemptions. Mr. Semple: Why not accept the amendment ?

Mr. Coates said he was not prepared to accept the amendment, but he would look into the points raised. Later he said lie would try to draft the clause excluding children under 17 years of age who were earning a certain wage. Mr. Wilkinson Not Satiisfled.

Mr. Wilkinson said he was not satisfied with the Minister's assurances. He thought members of the Coalition Party would find it very difficult to support the Minister in this matter.

Mr. Coates: Then it will be taken definitely as a no-confidence vote, because you are forcing the situation. I gave my word to the House that I would do a certain thing and I expected it to be accepted. The amendment was defeated by 38 votes to 24. Labour members and Messrs. H. Atmore, A. M. Samuel, C. A. Wilkinson and R. A. Wright voted for the amendment.

Mr. W. J. Jordan (Labour —Manukau) moved to exempt every person earning £2O a year or less from payment of the tax.

This was defeated by 40 votes to 24. Mr. J. McCombs (Labour —Lyttelton) moved that no woman should be liable to pay unemployment tax unless definite provision was made for work or sustenance.

This was rejected by 39 votes to 24 and the clause was passed. Mr. F. W. Schramm (Labour—Auckland East) moved that no blind woman employed at the Jubilee Institute should be liable to pay the wages tax. Mr. Coates said he thought the hardship clause would make the necessary provision in this respect, but if that was not satisfactory it might be possible to deal with the matter by Order-in-Council. The motion was withdrawn. Other Amendments Lost. Replying to Mr. Barnard, Mr. Coates said he was quite sure the clause enabling moneys in the Unemployment Fund to be used for the purchase of food, clothing or other necessities was drafted in such a way that provision was made for the payment of rent where necessary. Mr. W. E. Parry (Labour —Auckland Central) moved a new clause providing for the payment of sustenance to unemployed women. This was defeated by 39 votes to £3. Mr. H. Atmore (Independent—Nelson) moved that women and girls should not be called upon to pay the unemployment levy or the wages tax unless some definite scheme for relief for unemployed women and girls was established. This was defeated by 36 votes to 24. The Leader of the Opposition, Mr. H. E. Holland, moved that all workers under unemployment schemes should receive payment for each day worked. Hie motion was defeated by 38 votes to 24. The bill was reported as amended, read a third time and passed. The House rose at 7.37 a.m.