THE BASIC WAGE

Southland Times, Issue 19224, 14 May 1921, Page 3

THE BASIC WAGE

COST OF LIVING. COMMENT IN AUSTRALIA. The report of the Basic Wage Commission, Melbourne, makes some interesting comments in regard to this much-discussed question. Reference is made to a decision of the Commonwealth Arbitration Court that the index numbers of the Commonwealth Statistician were to be regarded only as prima facie evidence, yet it is emphasised that its actual decisions practically correspond with the variations in the indexed numbers. In 1914 the Commonwealth Statistician found that rent, and food together approximately constituted 60 per cent, of the ordinary expenditure of a household, leaving 40 per cent, to clothing and miscellaneous. Since 1914 it had been assumed that the percentage for clothing and miscellaneous had remained constant year by year. It was, however, in the years of the war that clothing had increased in price at a greater ratio than any other section of the cost of living, and this contention, it is said, is borne out by the figures ascertained by the Commission. The reliability of index numbers had, therefore, been open to the objection that if the cost of clothing should advance or decline in a different proportion from that of rent, plus food, then 40 per cent, would no longer constitute the cost of clothing, plus miscellaneous. Other proceedings before the Arbitration Court are quoted, and it is stated that to follow up the fluctuations in prices was a method that could not be adopted until a standard had been determined as to requirements. Until the money necessary for clothing, rent, food, etc., could be stated separately in reference to the determined standard of living, it was not possible for the Statistician to follow up fluctuations in the aggregate cost of such sections. The inclusive cost of living in Melbourne was ascertained to be as follows:—1914, £3 7/9; 1915, £3 16/9; 1916, £3 17/5; 1917, £4 2/2; 1918, £4 8/10 j 1919, £4 18/5; 1920, £5 16/6. Similar particulars are given for the other capital cities. The results for 1920 were: Sydney, £5 17/1; Brisbane, £5 6/2; Adelaide, £5 16/1; Perth, £5 13/11; and Hobart, £5 16/11. Another table is given showing what the cost of the weekly wage would be if the harvester wage of £2 2/- a week in Melbourne had been varied by the application of the Statistician’s index numbers. The results would have been in 1920: Sydney, £4 10/9; Melbourne, £4 10/7; Brisbane, £3 18/5; Adelaide, £4 7/-; Perth, £3 17/6; and Hobart, £4 13/4; the average being £4 8/7. These disparities are attributed to the fact that the Commonwealth Statistician’s enquiries omitted any separate consideration of the two sections, clothing and miscellaneous requirements, and that his index numbers showed only the variations in the cost of food, plus rent.