MR MUNRO AND THE UNEMPLOYMENT BOARD.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21242, 24 January 1931, Page 12

MR MUNRO AND THE UNEMPLOYMENT BOARD.

TO THE EDITOR. Sib,—A special message in the Dominion says: — “It the Unemployment Board had any serious intentions it could have had the position throughout New Zealand well in hand hy now,” declared Mr J. W. Munro, M.P., during an address to a gathering of unemployed in Queen’s Gardens, Dunedin, on Monday afternoon. After trenchantly condemning the workers for electing the United Party to office, Mr Munro added: “ What do the moneyed class care it you are out of work?” When the members of the Unemployment Board were appointed, he continued, the United Government “ shunted ” the whole of the responsibility of providing work and money for the unemployed on the board. In his opinion, the board, If it had had any serious intentions, could have had the position well In hand by now, but the board did not directly represent the workers, and consequently with only two workers’ representatives it was getting nowhere. This is the sort of uninformed criticism that is hampering the Unemployment Board, and, because it is made by a member of Parliament, it deserves a little attention. Mr Munro’s ignorance of the actual facts is inexcusable, by virtue of the position he holds, and if it is his opinion that efforts to set' class against class are going to help in the present serious troubles the Dominion is experiencing, then one is justified in doubting his usefulness as a maker of the country’s laws. The Unemployment Board can afford to overlook the assertion that it has no “ serious intentions ” concerning the handling of the unemployment question. The assertion is unworthy even of Mr Munro. The chief responsibility of the board is not the providing of work and money, but of organising schemes for -the employment of labour, and of acting in an advisory capacity to the local committees formed in all parts of the country. It is the “ clearing house of ideas,” and its members are specially qualified efficiently to deal with every phase of industrial farming and labour activities. Mr Munro is correct in stating that the board “does not directly represent the workers.” If it directly represented the workers, or the capitalists, or any distinct class of the community its efforts to solve .what is a national problem would be worthless. If Mr Munro desires evidence that the eight members of the board take their heavy responsibilities very seriously, and that their firm policy is to exclude any hint of class favouritism, it is probable that the board will be pleased to supply it— l am, etc., Vigilant. Wellington, January 22i to the editor. Sir, —Mr Munro’s address in the Queen’s Gardens on Monday last put me in mind of a Socialist speaking in Auckland some years ago on a soap box. It was like an empty bottle in an empty sack—nothing in it. Mr Munro said the workers were unemployed because they themselves voted for the United Party last election, and then he went on to say that haj they voted the Labour Party into power there would be little unemployment to-day, for which reason he advised them to put a Laboiir Council into power in Dunedin in April. In my opinion, since Mr Munro has gone to extremes, he may not himself be elected a councillor in April. The ratepayers and the sane workers, although there are a good many of the latter who have not got a home of their own, and are unfortunate to be unemployed, will not forget Mr Munro trying to bluff the Mayor to give up the £BOO to Mr Batchelor. I often wondered how the unemployed would have fared if the Trades Hall people had got the £BOO, and whether any of it would have gone in the expense of conducting a community fish business, dry cleaning, and window cleaning business. I would remind Mr Munro that there is a Labour Government at Home which was going to solve the unemployment problem. That was what its members told the electors, before the last election, but since they got into power unemployment has increased by hundreds of thousands, and as the workers have been unable to buy food, clothing, etc., the effect has been that the price of our produce has fallen 60 to 70 per cent. The workers have seen for themselves that the Labour Government has proved a failure, and at the recent municipal elections at Home Labour was badly beaten right through the country, where there are millions of workers. Coming nearer home, the Labour Party will never forget the City Council byelection at Christchurch last Apr il, where the Citizens’ Association nominee, Mr Jones, beat the Labour candidate, Mr H. T. Armstrong, by over 3000 votes. Christchurch had a Labour Council for some time, and the people found that the methods adopted by the Socialists were unsatisfactory, and expressed their sentiment very effectively at the polls. The Socialists’ main platform pledge was that they would find work for the unemployed during the coming winter, but the electors were too wise after the Socialists’ methods had proved so unsatisfactory while they were in the majority on the council.—l am, etc., January 22. Queer fellow.