UNEMPLOYMENT IN BRITAIN

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21924, 8 April 1933, Page 12

UNEMPLOYMENT IN BRITAIN

TO THE EDITOR. Sir —You quote Mr Neville Chamberlain (Chancellor of the British Exchequer) as saying that over ft period of years from 1924 to 190 l the policy of spending money for the assistance or the unemployed had not even touched -the fringe of the problem, and, further, had not kept pace with the growth of same therefore the British National Government—while in the Chancellor s words some of this money: Irom 1924 to Ij3l £450,000,000 was spent on housing, £120.000,000 on unemployment grants, and £90,000,000 on roads ’’—had now come u> the conclusion that unemployment had come to stay, and no hope was in sight for at least 10 years. The National Government, according to Mr. Chamberlain, had now exhausted “practically all they could do in anticipation of needs, and that remedy was no longer open to them. What a picture! Could any utterance be more condemnatory of the absolute failure of the present system of private ownership and control for profit, which is supported by tins National Government to assist further the .derelict unemployed in the midst of abundance, which these unemployed have assisted to create. Now, because their labour cannot be exploited further they are dumped as we would dump any old piece of furniture we had no use tor. ihe irony of it! Thirty years ago the head of this Government, Mr Ramsay MacDonald, wrote: “That poverty was caused by the exploitation of the poor. J- n August, 1931, he openly joined the exploiters. On February 23, 1933, t British Labour Party, in the House ot Commons, moved the following motion. —“ That this House deplores the entire failure of the Government to deal with the problem of unemployment, and its continuance in a course which, by loading the purchasing power of the masses and restricting the flow of trade, has resulted in an increase of over 400,000 unemployed in 12 months; and this House calls upon the Government to initiate and carry through a far-reaching plan tor the utilisation in the interests ,of the nation of the national resources in land, I credit, materials, and man-power which are now lying idle, so as to increase the , total production of wealth in the coim- | try.” This motion was defeated by 414 ito 49. On February 5 of this year the 1 workers (employed and unemployed), leu by Mr George Lanshury, M.P., Leader of ! the Parliamentary Labour Party in the , House of Commons, demonstrated and marched in a huge procession to Hyde Park, where, from, eight platforms, the case against the National Government was put. As a result they have got the wind up and have voted a £900,000 subi sidy for the mobilising of the territorial army in case of trouble. In the New Clarion of February 25, Mr Mac Neil Weir, writing of the_ doings at Westminster, asks the question: ' Is it war. What has happened in the past may and can happen again. Three million unemployed and a Government which intends to wait and see! What will the result , be?—l am, etc., ’ P. Neilson. I [ln a later speech at, Edinburgh Mr ! Chamberlain, while reiterating that “re- | lief works arc futile,” affirmed the Government’s readiness to entertain “ works ’ that are good in therasclvca.”--ED., O.D.T.]