THE “DOLE-HUNTERS”

Taranaki Daily News, 1 September 1930, Page 8

THE “DOLE-HUNTERS”

HABIT SPREADS DANGEROUSLY.- . LONDON TIMES GIVES WARNING. The responsibility for the spread of the dole habit falls upon the Government rather than the dolehunters. Under the heading “The Dole Habit,” the London Times in a leading article last month gave serious warning of the effects of amendments to the Unemployment Insurance .Act in undermining the insurance principle and encouraging living upon doles. The article commented upon.an official calculation of increased expenditure from the Unemployment Insurance Fund, and contended that this was under-stated. “Still less, of course” (The Tinies proceeded), does the calculation represent the whole cost of unemployment. The fund is bound to pay benefit to those who qualify for it because they have paid at least 30 contributions in the past two years. The rest of the unemployed are paid more or less of a dole by the Exchequer, and (according to an answer given in the House of Commons) are now costing the taxpayer L 15,000,000 a year. It is a melancholy thought that Mr. Snowden’s liability to find this money for doles may have forced him to imperil the existence of the Government by refusing to find a similar sum for the relief of company reserves, and it would be hard to find a more significant example of how a prodigal ‘short-term’ policy frustrates a •long-term’ policy towards unemployment. The House of Commons would do a public service by asking Mr. Snowden, when- the new borrowing Bill is introduced, to draw up a draft bal-ance-sheet covering the operations of the ‘short-term’ policy during the current year. Whatever he might be able to set off as credit he must show on the debit side L 15,000,000 given by the taxpayer in direct doles to the unemployed, L 3,300,000 in doles to widows, a contingent liability of L 23,000,000 advanced to the Insurance Fund, a substantial sum given for more and bigger grants in aid of relief work, and a further large sum added to the rates by that part of the fl 10,000,000 sanctioned for relief works which will be spent within the period under review. He would thus have little difficulty in convincing his Socialist critics that the Government is thoroughly inoculated with the dole habit. "Signs are not warning that the dole habit, is spreading from the Government ito the people under

of the Unemployment Insurance Act of 1930. The figures already quoted show how far the Socialists have realised their ambition to instal a non-contributory system. The expenditure of £18,009,900 a year upon. doles means .that between 300,0'00 and 400,000 persons are drawing relief at benefit rates, and can continue to draw it provided that they have worked in insurable employment for eight out of the preceding 104 weeks, or for 30 weeks at any time? No person has to look for work, and no person of any ingenuity need stay in a job found for him if he does not like it. Ourfgprrespondents have detailed cases showing that both the private employer and local authorities find it impossible to prevent men from leaving employment within a few hours or days of taking it up, and the Act furnishes even more excuses for dropping' a job than for not, finding one. The most flagrant idler can pleqd that the job was not ‘suitable employment,’ and, if that excuse fails, he has only to provoke the employer to discharge him in order to go straight back to benefit. A remarkable case is reported as ‘not very exceptional’ by the Department bf Health for Scotland in their recent annual report. A young man of 27 years of age (now dead) never paid more than one contribution a year since he entered insurance, and that contribution was in respect of annual attendace at camp. He not only lived but inarried ‘on the dole,’ | havjng found out, as one of our correspondents remarks, that this is the equivalent of living on the proceeds of £2OOO safely invested. It is estimated that £4OO of capital expenditure is required by industry to put a man in work. The break-up of the insurance system by the. dole means that every dole receiver is drawing the equivalent of interest on the capital sufficient to put five men in work. The dole habit, translated into legislation, leads to curious results in spheres other than that of unemployment insurance. The reiport already quoted relates that a man i hit his wife on the head with a coal I hammer. Thinking he had killed her,' |he drowned himself in the Clyde. She recovered and is drawing a widow’s pension. “The responsibility for the spread of [ the dole habit falls upon the Governiment rather than the dole hunters. The [really serious point is that the income of a person out of work has become ! very little less than the income of many persons in work, and very much more likely than before to provide him with a comfortable living. The cost of living lias fallen since 1921 by about 1224 per cent. During the same period the rates of unemployihent benefit have risen by 13 per cent, for a single man and by 33 per emit. folt a married man >./■ i \ _

I■‘. i t . * with three children. The real incoin* of the unemployed, is thus much greater; £he real income of. the employed is about the same —perhaps even a little less. A married man with three children call draw 32s a week. if he does not work, and 35s a week if he works on a farm. Why, he may well ask, should he work for 3s a week ? The temptation to moral deterioration ottered by the invitation to draw the dole ii increased by the physical deterioration induced by the absence of regular -work. People suffering from unemployment for long periods become physically unfit for the relief works which appear to be all the Government can think of providing. Th® national reputation suffers— as it ; undoubtedly- suffered in , the case of the Canadian harvesters—because unfitnes* is mistaken for unwillingness. The behaviour of the unemployed reflects therefore a national danger even more than i a national scandal. For both danger and ’ scandal the Government must bear a heavy responsibility. They . have smashed the insurance ' system; they have lavished the national resources .on doles and relief works, and thereby they have done much to. frustrate their own professed ‘long-term’ policy ot th® stimulation of industry by which alon® our people can be kept in work and fit for work.. The sooner they realise that public indignation is rising against th® propagation of the dole habit, the better for themselves and for the country.”