UNEPLOYMENT BILL

Stratford Evening Post, Issue 7, 30 July 1930, Page 5

UNEPLOYMENT BILL

READ A SECOND TIME REFERRED TO COMMITTEE OPINIONS OF PARLIAMENT WELLINGTON, July 29. Resuming the debate in the House of Representatives on the second reading of the Unemployment Bill, Mr J. g. Fletcher said he considered that the nomenclature included a wrong psychology. It should be the Employment Bill and the aboard should bo called the Employment Board. Dealing with the fiat rate, Mr Fletcher pointed out that it only amounted to the price of a packet of cigarettes per week. He suggested that bachelors should have to pay more than married men. Mr Fletcher favoured the creation of four economic committees, one in each of the main centres to undertake the work it was proposed to allot to the board. Mr W. H. Field said he hoped it would be possible to repeal the Bill before long. He did not think unemployment would be a permanent or serious problem. In his opinion it could bo cured by developing secondary industries that were natural to the Dominion, and assisting those primary industries that were lagging behind. Mr F. Langstone said that tha development of New Zealand industries would absorb the unemployed and would best be achieved by increasing toe purchasing power of the pccpl.6 He suggested that raising the money by a flat rate would be costly and it would be more simple and more equitable if the money were raised through the Land and Income Tax Department. AForkers would not readily agree to pax a poll tax when they were fully aware that the tendency for the financial resources of the Dominion to get into fewer and fewer hands was continuing. Farm Labour Subsidised. Mr D. McDougall said that talking would never help those who wer-3 in need. A great deal of time had been wasted. The Bill would have to go before a committee and it would then be improved where necessary. He advocated granting farmers a fifty-fifty subsidy on labour employed on their land. * This would encourage a drift back to the country. Mr McDougall urged that the Bill should be pent to the committee without further xvaste of time. Mr H. S. S. Kyle said he considered that the United Party was seeking an. indirect way to reduce wages on relief works. It was endeavouring to La’id he problem of unemplovment over to he Board, and he believed it hoped he Board would reduce relief rates. Personally he thought it wis time the wages of single men on relief works should be reduced.

Did Not Go Far Enough. ,M; R. McKeen said lie hid not so inui'li to complain abiuc what was in the Bill ns about what had been left out of it. It lid not go far enough. Mr Me Keen strongly diff Ted from the opinion expressed by Mr Hamilton that restrictions in the awards were responsible .for unemployment. 11 >3 said that ample precaution was taken that all awards were sufficiently elastic to prevent such a ansi l ion Mr H. Holland (Christ diuicn North) replied to the statements ’Hat the Reform Party’s immigration policy had been responsib’3 for unemployment. He contended that there was no foundation for such statements and asked whether unemployment in Australia and the United States could be attributed to such a cause. Mr E. Semple said he regarded the Bill as a indictment against the Governments of the past, an insult to the working men and a manifestation of the present Government’s inability to deal with the situation. Instead of seeking to offer the working men a semi-charitable allowance, the Government should have put forward a serious scheme for employing the natural mineral and other wealth of the Dominion and for developing secondary industries. No Time to Reply. The Hon. S. G. Smith (Minister for Labour), in reply said it was impossible in the two minutes at his disposal to deal adequately with all the points that had been raised during the debate. He assured members that the committee dealing with Bill would give every detail tnorough consideration. The Bill was then read a second time and on the motion of Mr Smith was referred to a special Select Committee consisting of Messrs Smith, Veitch, Campbell, Howard, McPherson, Munns, J. Nash, Poison, Savage and Waite. The House adjourned at 5.30 p.m, till 7.3 U p.m.