RELIEF WAGES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21165, 23 April 1932, Page 10

RELIEF WAGES.

INCREASE IN RATES.

NO STAND-DOWN WEEK.

THE NEW CONDITIONS.

STARTING NEXT MONTH.

HIGHER TAX PROCEEDS.

[BY TELEGRAPH. —SPKCIATj T!EPORTKR. 1 "WELLINGTON. Friday

The abolition of the stand-down week in unemployment relief, with the intention that registered unemployed should be provided as far as the available funds permit with work and relief every week, was announced this evening by tho Minister in Charge of Unemployment, the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates. The change will date from May. Hitherto, all the unemployed have stood down one week in each four-weekly period, and a considerable burden has been thrown on the hospital boards in that week. "There will be no attempt to standardise conditions and methods of administering relief in all places," said Mr. Coates. "A certain amount of latitude will be allowed in making local arrangements to suit local needs. Retails of Payment, " The weekly basis of payment, which will be adjusted according to requirements, will be as under:—Single men, two days' work, 15s; married men without children, 2£ days' work, £1 ss; married men with one child, three days' work, £1 10s; married men with two children, days' work, £1 15s; married men with three or more children, four days' work, £2. " In this new scale, different provision is made for married men without children, for those with ono child and those with two children. Formerly these were grouped together in one class. It is recognised also that some provision must be made for larger families, varying with the number of dependent children. " In part, this need has been met by family allowances, which are payable to the mother at tho rate of two shillings a week for the third and later children. The National Expenditure Commission recommended the abolition of these allowances, but having regard to tho needs of families in the lower income groups, including relief workers, the Government has decided not to adopt this recommendation. Purchase of Necessities.

" Further, the amending Unemployment Act of this session authorises the use of money from the Unemployment Fund in the purchase of necessities. This will be availed of as far as is reasonably possible, and will bo related to family needs. "The additional provision thus made will greatly increase the cost to the Unemployment Fund and this has necessitated the higher taxation imposed during the present session. Yet, even with the revised scales, it is well recognised that there will be scope for most valuable work by voluntary social organisations, and it is the hope of the Government that these bodies will receive further public support, so that they may continue to function. Without in any way interfering with their admirable work, the Government will gladly take part in co-ordin-ating their work to avoid overlapping. It is to these local voluntary organisations, linked together by central committees, that the Government and Unemployment Board look.

" In dealing with the problem of unemployment affecting women, the board is working with these central committees and suggestions put forward by women's organisations through those committees are sympathetically considered." A Real Improvement.

In commenting on the scales of relief now to be applied, the Minister remarked that while they were not as generous as could be desired, they represented a real improvement on anything hitherto attempted. The revenue of the Unemployment Fund, allowing for the yield from the increased unemployment taxation levied this session, could be estimated at £3,600,000. The total of relief pay on scheme No. 5 at the rates now announced must exceed £3,000,000 and this is apart from expenditure on all other schemes and forms of assistance.

In further reference to these, including land occupation on small sections, farm improvement and reproductive works generally, the Minister indicated that further information would be made available presently. To apply the sustenance provisions of the Act would cost not less than £5,000,000 a year with the present number of unemployed and this would obviously mean on the taxation side an increase in the present wages tax, which is already ono shilling in the pound. Relief for Hospital Boards.

Replying to questions, Mr. Coates said it was probable that, the change-over of the burden of relief from hospital boards to the Unemployment Boai-d would take place in about ten days or a fortnight. Hospital boards would still deal with ordinary cases of indigents. Under the new scheme of giving assistance in the purchase of necessities, there would bo no question of applicants forming queues, as dockets would be issued so that supplies could be obtained probably on firms which would bo indicated to the applicants.

Mr. Coates said it was possible in some cases that, existing organisations would be utilised for the distribution of rolief. As far as Auckland was concerned, the officer in charge of the Labour Department had charge of tho arrangements for the conduct of tho scheme. It was hoped to avoid overlapping in tho distribution of relief, but Mr. Coates said it was still urgently desired that, existing social organisations should function in the interests of ameliorating the plight of the unemployed. However, ihe utmost coordination was essential. Mr. Coates mentioned that the services of the unemployed would be utilised as far as possible for clerical and other work in the conduct of the scheme.

Under the No. 5 scheme, the men employed on relief works were divided into classes and the amounts they were allowed to earn were fixed according to their family responsibilities. They were thus classified into four-day men, three-day men and two-day men. Tho four-day men were married men with three or more children and the maximum relief which they could obtain was 37s 6d a week. Three-day men were married men with two, one or no children, and their maximum relief was 27s 6d a week, while tho two-day men were single men who were unfit to go into relief camps. Their maximum earnings were fixed at 10s a week. In all cases the men worked three weeks and were then required to stand down for one week.

The maximum payable as family allowances is fixed by a clause in tho National Expenditure Adjustment Bill, now beforo the House of Representatives, at £3 5s a week. Tho particular clause has been passed by the House.