REVIVAL OF TRADE

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 985, 30 May 1930, Page 13

REVIVAL OF TRADE

“UNEMPLOYMENT’S ONLY CURE”

EMPLOYERS’ OPINION < There is no cure for unemployment except a revival of trade. No scheme of insurance would tend to minimise unemployment, but rather to increase it. These two remarks are taken from the statement of the executive of the Auckland Employers’ Association, giving reasons why it cannot agree with the report submitted to the Government by the Unemployment Committee. Mr. A. Spencer, president of the association, issued the following statement yesterday on behalf of the executive: INCOMPLETE REPORT “We are of opinion that the report I Is not complete, and therefore it is not I an adequate analysis of causes of unemployment. The relative signilicanee of such causes as have been assigned is immaterial until all other causes have been ascertained and, in any case, the survey of the position, hav- ! ing admittedly been only partial, is j necessarily incomplete, i “The proposed employment board I could not be vested with the extra- ) ordinary powers proposed without i over-riding the authority of Parliaj ment altogether, an extension of that | bureaucratic control which is contrary i to all principles of democratic government. While the Unemployment Committee expresses itself as being unanimously of opinion that the adoption of an unemployment insurance scheme on the lines of those operating in other countries would be a very grave mistake, it nevertheless proceeds to outline a scheme providing inadequate relief from ail uncollectable tax, “Unemployment is not an insurable risk like lire, sickness or accident. No scheme of insurance would tend to minimise unemployment, but rather to increase it. “Unemployment Is as much a moral as an economic problem, and the individual responsibility to obtain and retain employment “cannot be shelved simply by registration and throwing the onus of responsibility on the community and the Government.

UNDERMINING CONDITIONS “The right to claim a sustenance allowance without working for it, or to demand a standard wage without earning it, would, if admitted, undermine the whole of the economic conditions governing employment. The relief of distress through unemployment or any other cause is a humanitarian obligation which has always, and will be always, recognised. The contention, however, that the maintenance of surplus labour must be accepted as an economic liability on industry is a dangerous fallacy in a country like New Zealand.” With the machinery now at the disposal of the Government, the executive considers that there might be some reorganisation and better co-ordina-tion. There is no necessity for setting up another State department. “Although it is not proposed to elaborate the reasons which led to the above conclusions, it might, by way of illustration, be pointed out that, assuming the Government set up a board as recommended in the report, for six months after the board began to function no relief whatever would be provided under the scheme. In fact, the position would be aggravated bv the specialised taxation enforced withdrawing moneys which might have been voluntarily expended in relief. WORKING OF THE BOARD “After six months, assuming the board had in the meantime been able to exercise to the full its taxing power, a fund would be available from which those out of work, who also had duly paid their share of taxation iu the meantime, would be entitled to sustenance allowance not exceeding 13 weeks in any one year. What is to become of them after that is apparently to be no business of the board. “Such provision is, of course, utterly inadequate to meet conditions as existing now in New Zealand. The fact is that the board would neither be able to provide work for the unemployed nor give adequate relief unless vested with powers which it is obvious could not be given to an irresponsible body. “The Auckland Employers’ Association trusts therefore that the Government in dealing with the matter will i ecognise, as is being recognised throughout the world, that there is no cure for unemployment except revival of trade." Mr. Spencer said that before making any pronouncement the executive had referred the matter to the New Zealand Employers’ Federation. A meeting of the executive of the federation was held last week, with ,the result that Mr. W. D. Hunt and Mr. T. O. Bishop, wh.o were stated to have been representatives of the employers in the committee announced that as members of the committee, they were not the mouthpiece of any organisation. The employers’ associations, through the federation, were therefore not now identified in any way with the committee’s report.