UNEMPLOYMENT OFFICE

Putaruru Press, Volume XII, Issue 563, 15 March 1934, Page 5

UNEMPLOYMENT OFFICE

MATAMATA ATTITUDE Small Subsidy Approved Details of the informal meeting between members of the Matamata County Council and staff and representatives of the Matamata Town Board and Unemployment Committee concerning the continuation of the latter at Matamata in view of the fact that the subsidies from the council and the board had been withdrawn were given to the Matamata Town Board on Thursday evening by Messrs. W. A. Gordon (chairman) and G. G. Bell.

It was stated that the committee had decided that it should continue to function, with a relief worker as secretary, provided that the council and board, together, subsidised the wages to the extent of 22s 6d a week, making the total amount £3. This was conditional, said Mr. Bell, on the Town Board supplying 7s 6d and the County Council the remainder, 15s.

Mr. A. E. Wrigley: I suppose this places the retaining of the man in the hands of the certifying officer.

Mr. Bell: I understand from Wellington that that is left to the committee.

That he was opposed to any local body making a contribution towards unemployment was the opinion of Mr. O. Heerdegen. “ For that reason I am opposed to any payment in any shape or form towards the unemployment secretary,” he explained.

“ As a matter of principle it may be wrong to contribute anything, but as a matter of expediency I think we should contribute the 7s 6d. We will get more than that out of it,” replied the chairman.

Mr. Heerdegen contended that it was a matter of moral obligation for local bodies to pay only for full time and wages and for expeditious and essential work. Other work should not be done at all. “We should be out to exercise the greatest economy and not to explore what might be characterised as cheap labour,” he said. “Surely a local body is under an obligation to set an example to those wealthy people who do not have full-wage labour.” Mr. W. M. Griffiths pointed out that one should consider the number of ratepayers who were not in a position to pay much.

Mr. Heerdegen: It does not seem consistent when we have a balance of £2OOO.

The clerk (amid laughter): At the end of November we will have an overdraft of as much.

“ I must confess I am unable to follow the logic of Mr. Heerdegen’s reasoning,” said Mr. Bell, in reply. “He says that no local body work will save ratepayers’ money and that we should refuse to use relief labour and should pay full wages. On the one hand he says ‘ help the ratepayers ’ and on the other ‘ spend their money.’ ”

Mr. Heerdegen: You keep to sound argument.

Mr. Bell: If there is relief labour available we should give it to the ratepayers. I cannot see that there is anything wrong with the principle.

Mr. Wrigley: The discussion has overlooked the men’s point of view. Mr. Bell: We cannot let these men starve because we disagree with the b'-ard’s policy.

Maintenance work allegedly unneeded was touched upon by Mr. Heerdegen.

“We have kerbing and channels we. -would have had to wait for for 20 years if they had had to come out of the ratepayers’ money,” declared Mr. Bell.

Asked by Mr. Heerdegen if he would dispense with the permanent staff, Mr. Bell replied that he did not believe in sacking men. Mr Heerdegen: The Matamata district is capable of absorbing all the available unemployment labour in revenue-producing and remunerative occupations and with better wages than under present conditions. At this stage the resolution that the Town Board pay 7s 6d towards the secretary’s wages, providing the -County Council provides 15s, was then put to the meeting and carried. Mr. Heerdegen dissenting. Explaining- his apparent change of attitude over the voting, Mr. Vincent said he had been opposed to a payment of 25s previously, and he i would be against raising the board’s share above 7s fid.