THE UNEMPLOYMENT BILL.

Taranaki Daily News, 18 July 1930, Page 8

THE UNEMPLOYMENT BILL.

As an indication that Parliament has settled down to serious business the Unemployment Bill introduced by the Minister of Labour, the Hon. S. G. 'Smith, is welcome. His suggestion that tho second reading be taken with a brief discussion and the Bill at once referred to a special committee should meet with general approval in the House of Representatives. The committee is to be empowered io take evidence from all persons interested, and the Minister - has given an assurance that any reasonable amendments to the Government’s proposals will be acceptable. Relief and prevention of unemployment is no party Question, and if Parliament is in earnest the Bill should emerge from the committee considerably improved. Until this stage has been reached comment upon the provisions of the Bill is somewhat difficult. It proposes to set up an employment board f.o develop avenues of employment much on the lines recommended by the special committee which investigated the unemployment problem on behalf of the Government. The 'board is to bo financed by a universal levy of 3Os per annum from all males over the age of 20 years, with certain exemptions. The levy is to be subsidised by the State on all sums expended. From the fund sustenance allowances to men out of work will bo paid, but these will not be claimable until unemployment has existed tor two weeks, and the period during whicn relief is to be given is limited to .13 weeks. Machinery is provided for registration in regard to employment and for the collection of the levy. Admitting that the problem of unemployment is one of the most insistent in the land, the- new Bill appears to be vitiated by its main principle. It seems to be an unqualified recognition that provision for unemployment must "be regarded as part of the administrative duties of the State instead of the lack of employment being considered a temporary evil that must be overcome. If the Bill is to become law Its period of operation should be definitely limited until it is seen how far the development work rendered possible by the levy is really removing tho causes of unemployment. Unless this removal is effected no legislation can do more than set up fresh palliative treatment of an evil that in a young country like this should •be unthinkable. The whole question of wages and conditions of labour is involved, and a thorough overhaul is essential if the .country is to get back to prosperity. It will be interesting to observe how this most important feature of the problem and its remedy is handled by the committee. Inadequacy in this regard would effectually destroy any prospect of the Bill proving efficacious in abolishing unemployment.