UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21646, 17 May 1932, Page 10

UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF

TO THE EDITOR. Sib, —ln a recent editorial you pointed out that the State was liable to come on the market as a purchaser in connection with the small farm plan, and issued a warning against bungling _ as in the past. Again, your reporter interviewed Mr Black concerning the revised scheme and was told that it would still be necessary to distribute food despite the improved position of the Government, due to the increased wages’ tax. Mr Black pointed out that the men were, very, little better off and that the advantages were more imaginary than real, and that, in fact, married men with no children would work two days and a-half more for a monthly payment, which would be 12s 6d less than formerly. He further pointed out that with the wages’ tax increased by 300 per cent., a big improvement should be found in the relief of the unemployed as a whole, but that such would not be the case. Mr Black has since organised the churches and depots to increase their activities instead of closing them down. Where are these increased funds going that are raised for the special purpose of relief of the unemployed? There has not beep an abnormally sudden rise of unemployed to drain the increase. The relief of wealthy taxpayers has not swallowed up all the increased fax paid by the wageearner, and, as Mr Black points out, there is still a big balance left. The question to answer is, where are the funds coming from to buy the small farms, build the neat cottages, and subsidise the farmer?. Also ihe funds to subsidise farmers who, in some cases, are running two motor cars and can find no more than 2s 6d per week to pay for a man on the relief register and in many cases are holders of property and stock to the value of thousands, who will, before long, be'earning substantial incomes again? And again, as Mr P. W. Sh'acklock points out, who is supplying the, nedessary large capital costs to enable the unemployed to be taken advantage of by wealthy property owners of Corstrophine road and at Brockyille, where the unemployed are pitching the hardearned money of the poor into a mud heap? We would goon know, if the unemployed themselves were not denied representation upon unemployment boards, just how much is being spent in the private enterprise of supplying lorries, petrol, tools, piping and metal material, cement, and many' other such commodities, plus administration and supervision. If this money were spent on foodstuffs, clothing, and shelter produced only in New Zealand the returns of farmers, shopkeepers, factories, and workers would immediately improve and result in a reduction of the unemployed. It would have a greater circulating power than the expenditure as at present in sources employing little labour in New Zealand and earning no secondary income. It would abolish the belittling sugar bag and its destruction of selfrespect, the depots would disappear, and with them the huge drain due to the charitable gifts of the public, and the vast efforts of the organisers and collectors, at present a sheer waste of private wealth and energy. Shopkeepers would be relfeVed of. canvassing and would do business instead if this money were paid out decently instead of using it to take advantage of the unemployed. We would bh free from demonstrations and riots, and would not need special police nor have damaged property. The first question which the doubter asks is, Where is the money coming from? It is apparent that the money is in hand and more. The huge expenditure upon the capital costs I have mentioned is in sight, and if some think there is no money where will that required for neat cottages and the farms come from?—l am, etc., James T. Wedderspoon.

Oaraaru. May 14. fit is to be remembered that the Unemployment Board does not this year receive from the Consolidated Fund, as it did last year, a subsidy on the amount received from unemployment taxation. But this year's Act provides that the Consolidated Fund shall supply up to f 500,000 for the purchase of land and for unemployment relief and such other sums" as may be appropriated. There have been no concessions to " wealthy taxpayers " as our correspondent would make out, and if they were they would not "swallow up,*' the proceeds of the increased unemployment tax, which is paid by all classes of the community, as the yield from the tax does not pass through the Consolidated Fund at all.—En., O.D.T.]