The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1930. THE MAJOR PROBLEM.

Southland Times, Issue 21264, 10 December 1930, Page 6

The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1930. THE MAJOR PROBLEM.

Explaining the immediate plans of the Unemployment Board, Mr Finn made a good impression yesterday, and considerable interest was taken in the scheme to use the board’s subsidizing powers to increase the amount of useful work offered as relief measures. A possible criticism of these measures will be that farmers who have no financial margin to-day will be unable to finance the cost of improvement work even if a subsidy is provided, but these farmers will be no worse off than they arc at present, while those who can undertake operations of this kind will be assisting to employ men and at the same time will be helping themselves. The man who is in permanent employment is not likely to desert for the purpose of gaining a subsidy for bis employer, because the scheme limits itself to permanent work, and does not take within its scope the ordinary routine operations of the farm. There should be no difficulty about protecting the scheme from misuse of this kind, and the possibilities, providing there is active co-operation on all sides, are decidedly bright. Mr T. O’Byrne was wise in suggesting that a discussion on wages would be obstructive yesterday, and it seems to us that where Arbitration awards are in operation such a discussion cannot arise, and where no awards govern the scale of wages circumstances must influence decisions in individual cases. Flexibility is required in the successful operation of a scheme of this kind, and unions, as well as employers, local bodies and the Unemployment Board have put on them responsibilities to secure the best possible results. Improvement work of a definite character can be of direct benefit to the land and to the country and it is to be hoped, therefore, that the Unemployment Board will give attention to the claims of land held by local authorities or by the State, so that improvement schemes on a large scale can be undertaken without unduly loading the capital cost on the acres when they are leased or sold. Where work is undertaken on publicly owned land for the purpose of providing relief employment, the amount paid in subsidy should not be charged against tho land, but should bo treated as unemployment relief expenditure, and if land is improved in this way without increase to the overhead the apparent loss will be returned to the State in later years by the successful operation of tho improved property. The projects mentioned by Mr Finn hold out brighter promises than the expenditure of public money on roads and railways of dubious value, and they suggest that men may be put into useful work that will be profitable to them in the long run. It is well to emphasize the point that these are palliative- measures, and it is necessary to remember that they do not touch those questions to which Lord Barnby made reference in Dunedin. Lord Barnby enumerated the courageous, but unpopular steps New Zealand should take to regain her economic strength as quickly and as soundly as possible, and the list he presented should remind the public that wages reductions cannot be undertaken. Any action along this line must be universal in'its application, and ensure that prices generally will be affected in like manner, so that the sacrifice will be all-round, and the ultimate effect will be to restore the equilibrium on a slightly lower level. A temporary super-tax on incomes could be used to build up a fund out of which county rates can be subsidised, under conditions preventing any increase, of expenditure, so that the rates paid by farmers will be reduced. In that way the man on the land could obtain the

advantage of a reduction in laud valuation without having the valuations disturbed. Reductions in the wages paid to public servants can be justified as a means of reducing the eOst of administration, but action in that direction should be part of a scheme wide enough to embrace every section of the community. The industrial conference suggested by Mr Coates should be the preliminary step in any movement of this kind and it seems to us that the Government will find it necessary if it attempts to tackle the economic problem with any hope of success. The Unemployment Board is dealing with temporary measures, and it cannot do much more. The larger problem is one for the Government and the public and the sooner the initia steps are take the better it will be for this country as a whole.