The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1932. RELIEF PAY

Southland Times, Issue 21854, 3 November 1932, Page 4

The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1932. RELIEF PAY

Reductions in relief pay have been mentioned once or twice, and the Government ’has disposed of the rumour that a cut of fifty per cent, is contemplated; but much concern will be caused by the inferential information that the payments to relief workers are to be reduced. The fund has been strong enough to meet the demands on it, and the tax of one shilling in the £> on wages has been found adequate to this purpose. That no increase in the wages tax will be necessary will be welcomed, but not if the assistance accorded those who are on relief works is to be diminished. The present rates do not leave any margin, and they should not influence men against taking employment with private employers. If they do, of course, they defeat their purpose, and must be adjusted, because it is not intended that relief pay should keep men from returning to industrial occupations as the opportunity offers. An examination of the rates of pay, especially when the days lost in each month are taken into consideration will convince most people that they are not sufficiently attractive to keep any but confirmed loafers from taking employment with private employers. On the other' hand, although the prices of goods may have receded, the relief pay leaves no margin for relief workers, especially men with families, and reductions will probably throw heavier burdens on landlords who even now have to stand out of a considerable portion of their rents. Men and women who are in regular employment have received cuts by way of reductions or rationing but they count themselves more fortunate than those who must take refief work, and they pay to the Unemployment Fund for what, after all, is a real advantage. A reduction in summer months may sound feasible, but we doubt if the Government appreciates fully the position of the relief workers if it makes further reductions. It is better to keep the wages tax at its present level, even to increase it, than to make worse the plight of those who are now on relief. It would be better to see that those who are now compelled to pay transport charges out of their meagre aid obtain some measure of relief, than to intensify their difficulties by reducing what is already no more than adequate.