THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES MONDAY, JANUARY 18, 1932. UNEMPLOYMENT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21545, 18 January 1932, Page 6

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES MONDAY, JANUARY 18, 1932. UNEMPLOYMENT.

A definite indication was given by Mr Coates on Saturday, when he received two deputations of unemployed workers, differing widely in composition and typo, that Parliament will be asked in the emergency session, to be opened next month, to make fresh provision for unemployment relief. The Unemployment Board, as he says, is applying to relief purposes all the funds it receives, but the admission has unfortunately to be made that the volume of unemployment continues to be so great that the proceeds of the taxation which was imposed last year, with some sort of expectation that they would enable the Board to meet satisfactorily the demands upon it, are wholly insufficient for the purpose. Yet the amount that is being spent by the Boai’d is about £50,000 a week. If the full provisions of the Act, as far as sustenance payments are concerned, were to be applied, a sum of £85,000 a week, Mr Coates says, would be required. The Gov-

eminent is not likely to agree that the payment of sustenance allowances is desirable, even though the Unemployment Act makes provision for it, tod public sentiment may be said to be generally opposed to the introduction in New Zealand of any system which would correspond with the dole system so much abused in Great Britain in the past. There must, however, be a very widespread feeling of regret that the expenditure that is authorised by the Board is yielding results that are so pitiably paltry as most of them undoubtedly are. A sum of £50,000 is a very large amount to spend every week, but if it were wholly, or even mainly, productive of permanently valuable results the taxpayers would be far less critical of the expenditure than they have reason to be. As it is, a great deal of the expenditure is simply wasteful. It is most desirable that the Unemployment Board should evolve some policy under which the moneys placed at its disposal should be utilised much more advantageously than they are at the present time. The Board seems to have lost sight of its programme, broadcast three months ago, of transferring the labour of the unemployed from the roads to the land that is served by the roads. But since it is clear —and is, in fact, inevitable —that it should seek fresh funds to a considerable extent from taxation, it should recognise the importance of securing that the taxpayers should receive a return of some permanent value at least for the sums which are provided by them. Mr Coates made one announcement on Saturday that was received with great satisfaction by the deputation to which he communicated it. It was hoped, he said, to evolve a plan by which the need for the “stand down” week for workers might be avoided. If this can be brought about, it will be greatly appreciated by the unemployed upon whom the enforced week of idleness has pressed very hardly. It is plain, however, that the provision of continuous work for those who are unemployed will only be possible if the Unemployment Board is supplied with funds much more largely than it is at present. And this serves only to emphasise the argument that the work upon which the unemployed are engaged should be of real economic value. The taxpayers are entitled to expect that their money shall not be frittered away.