UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF.

Rodney and Otamatea Times, Waitemata and Kaipara Gazette, 1 July 1931, Page 5

UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF.

The question of unemployment relief has figured prominently due to exhaustion of the funds of the Unemployment Board and the consequent threat to suspend No. 5 unemployment schfipe. Happily the Prime Minister wt'. fiei'suadea to provide further funds to ijilb over the Joituight until Parliament met and there is overy reason to think that his action will-be approved by all sides of the Hou»e. But what of the future ? Experience to date has shown the futility of present arrangements as a means of meeting the uuemployment position. The fact is that there is not sufficient money iv hand or in prospect to carry on on the present basis It is a question that is due tv engage most uigeut alien ion at the session. Proposals to iuorease the uuemploj'ment levy are anticipated, and that would help; but in connection therewith consideration should certainly be given to the question of the incidence of the levy. i'he manifest anomalies that are created by tne present flat rate of levy will become still more marked if a higher levy is im posed on this basis. It should not be necessary for learned economists to point out the weakness of the principle; tuat should be self evident. In viow jgf the position that has been disclosed with regard to unemployment funds, few, we think, would be inclined to oppose a greater degree of sacrifice, provided they knew each individual was called upon to make equal sacrifice governed by his ability to pay ; furthermoie —and this is at least of equal moment—that the funds were expended to the best possible advantage. Effective as No. 5 scheme has been as a means of providing relief for unemployment, ie would be interesting to know what proportion of the thousands of pounds expended under it represents absolute economic waste. The very nature of the provisions of the scheme, in fact, encourage it, I'iie local authorities are virtually banned fruin utilising it iD uiftful directions — the only works permitted are those which in the ordinary course would not appear on. the estimates. Consequently there has been a ioveiiaii searching by the individual local authorities to find work to take ad van tage of the cheap labour offering. In most "instances their efforts towards unemployment relief during the past two years have strained their finances to a point when it is difficult for them to tinu the material for ordinarily u&e fui and productive works. Their choice of works is now therefore largely limited to directions requiring the- maximum ia labour and the mini mum in material. Never before iv the history of the country has there been such a scratching of roads and a grubbing of weeds. And what will this kind of work represent iv twelve months' time ? There are many programmes of useful and productive work waiting for an opportunity to be put in hand —works ot some economic value to the country. . Tliese are per force held in abeyance while public money, contributed iv rates auduueui ploymeut levy, goes iv makesuius the ultimate benefit from wtiich w ill be negligible. The economic waste winch at best must attend the carrying out of eveu ike most useful undertakings by lubjur unused to the woik is multiplied wneu mat labour is diverted to chanuels of doubtful or uo ultimate value. To all inten.cs tue mouey might just as well be given out as a dole. Tnere are opportunities from cad to end of the Country for unemployed labour to be utilised in potentially pro ductne directions. Where mdiviuual local authorities may have exhausted tbuir lesouiceoor mgeuuiiy, mauy use i ul schemes of couiujOu btmulit may be evolved by co.operaiiou between them. The regional view of unemployment relief is likely, to produce more lasting and productive results than individual effort. A loug sighted policy is just as desirable for relief work as for ordinary >ojai body or rfuue admiuis trauou. Piocemeai, haphazard methous nave nooning to commend them. The mot is recognised by tne United Stai.es Jj'cdeial liovernmeut iv its couiproueusive measure, fur dealing with me ' uip^yp'oyuieuc problem. Tlie jjlaip.oylLsUC otttbilisaiiou Act, 1931, whiuu ueoamtf law. last Febiuary, pro vides for '-the advance planning and regulatea ooust. UOiluu oi puuitu works, ior me stabilisation of luuusuy, and for a-<iing in the prevention oi uuein plojmeui during penou* oi bus.uens uepiessiou." Xo mis «v» v JjeUerai Employment Stabilisation Jioaid is set up iv, inter alia, • co.operaW with tlie conduction ttgeumes m !"■ 'uulaung uieuxocls ot advance piiu.uiug. Ihe advunoe p.auuiu^ ,iuoludeo tue >lpapai.ition oi detailed Cvju»uuuu,.u p»aus of uubuc works by me um.slucuou agencies aiid the boa.d." lue plans called ior cover a period oi ».x years,

and they must be kept up to date by annual revision. They constitute reserves of useful public work which can be put into operation without delay as soon as the unemployment position in any district may warrant. While conditions in the United States may not be reproduced entirely in New Zealand, the nature of this Act shows the fundamental value placed in that country on intelligent co.operation ami co.ordination of productive works aa unemployment relief measures. — "Board aud Council."