UNEMPLOYED RELIEF

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21505, 31 May 1933, Page 14

UNEMPLOYED RELIEF

METROPOLITAN WORK BOOT DEPOT VERY BUSY DEMAND FOR £SO SALES TAX A considerablo increase in the work being done at the boot repairing depot operated by tho Auckland Metropolitan Unemployment Belief Committee was reported at the meeting of the committee yesterday. The report of the boot depot btated that for the past three weeks 809 pairs of boots had been received for repairs, which represented an increase of over 50 per cent over any other similar period. A total of 6-16 pairs had been dealt with during the three weeks. It was reported that since the last meeting a total of £2237 had been received in addition to the fund, of which £2014 was the share of tho proceeds of an art union, £32 had been received from tho takings from community singing, sundry donations had totalled £B, and payments on account of boots and clothing had amounted to £173. With £96 taken by the bootrepairing depot, tho total received by tho committee since its inception amounted to £10,174. When outstanding accounts and commitments were met there would be a surplus of £2BS9. Grant to the Boot Pool The Mayor, Mr. G. W. Hutchison, who presided, said this was very satisfactory for present needs. A total of £2500 of this sum was on deposit earning 2$ per cent. A communication was received from the Commissioner of Employment stating that the Unemployment Board had agreed io An extension of the grant of £5 a week to the boot pool for a further period to Juno 30, and that if a further extension was required application should bo made.

The report of the officer in charge of the relief depot stated that during the past three weeks 619 pairs of boots had been issued at half cost to men who had been employed on No. 5 scheme for six months or more, 52 pairs to men in camp and 567 to men working in the metropolitan area. During the period 172 men proceeding to camp for the first time had been issued with one blanket, one pair of denims, one shirt or singlet and two pairs of socks free. The total number of boots issued for the 12 months to May 29 was 5198 pairs. Of these 2910 had been supplied at half cost and 2588 free to men in camp. Payment Under Protest It was reported that the committee would be called upon to pay the sum of £SO by way of sales tax on boots purchased for the unemployed. This sum had been paid by the contractor and, in reply to a request, tiie Comptroller of Customs had written stating that after careful consideration it was regretted that goods purchased by the committee could not be exempted from payment of sales tax. Mr. T. McNab said that the position was very unsatisfactory. The committee was carrying out its operations to help the Government, but could not get this measure of assistance. It was decided to pay the amount of £SO, but to make strong representations to the Minister of Customs, the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates, to have the payment remitted. Application for registration was made by Mr. T. Heaton on behalf of the Auckland Guild of Help Samaritan Service- stating that this was <a continuation of the Businessmen's Relief Service. The Rev. T. Halliday said the Auckland Social Workers' Association had investigated the operations of this organisation and had decided by resolution that it could not in any way recognise it. The application was declined.

Library Committee's Work Mr. Hutchison said that the War Memorial Library Committee was doing good work in supplying and handling all the books, magazines and other reading matter sent to the relief camps, but needed funds with which to carry on its work. In view of the great help given to the committee, it was decided to make a donation of £5 to the committee's funds. Application was made by dir. Halliday for a grant of £2O toward carrying on' the registration office operated bv the Social Workers' Association, which was costing £55 a year. The Mayor said the relief committee was getting a trc- . mendous amount of help from the social organisations, and on his motion it was decided to make a grant of £2O. Applications were received from a number of relief and welfare organisations throughout the suburbs for grants, but it was decided that assistance could be granted only to those organisations recognised and affiliatecl to the Metropolitan Committee, and further consideration was deferred until a complete list of these organisations could be prepared.

CONTROL OF RELIEF FUNDS REPLY TO CRITICISM When making some criticism of the administration of local relief funds, Mr. M. J. Savage, M.P., a member of the Auckland' Hospital Board, said there was considerable overlapping and there was need of proper public control of the funds. This statement was made at a meeting of the Hospital Board two weeks ago, and when some days later the Mayor, Mr. G. W. Hutchison, replied to these assertions, Mr. Savage said if the Mayor were to make careful inquiry from the members of his own relief committee he would find that dissatisfaction existed among them. Mr. Savage said his attention had been first drawn to it by a member of tho committee. The statement that there was dissatisfaction among members of the committee was referred to by Mr. Hutchison at a meeting of the Auckland Metropolitan Unemployment Relief Committee yesterday, when he asked the members to say whether there was any dissatisfaction among them. " As far as I am concerned there has been no dissatisfaction," said Mr. W. F. Stilwell, Mayor of Mount Albert, while Mr. T. MeNab, Mayor of Mount Eden, said he had never been better pleased with the working of any organisation he had been concerned with. " We work in perfect harmony and I am perfectly satisfied," said Archdeacon Holbrook.

The Rev. T. Halliday, president of the Auckland Social Workers' Association: We have been a very happy lot and I think Mr. Savage should be asked to name the member v'ho is alleged to have spoken to him. When the Mayor had assured himself that none of the members had any complaint to make about the operations of the committee, it was decided to ask Mr. Savage to give the name of the member who had expressed dissatisfaction with the committee's work.