NO. 4A RELIEF SCHEME.

Taranaki Daily News, 20 June 1931, Page 15 (Supplement)

NO. 4A RELIEF SCHEME.

(To the Editor.) (Sir,—With regard to the letter published in to-day’s Daily News re the breakdown of Scheme No. 5, your correspondent “Farmer” goes to some pains to decry the 4A scheme and those single men fortunate enough to be placed under it. He tells us that we need have no pity on those who through the past season have been doing their share towards our primary production, but'give them a kick and let them work for their tucker. This statement gives us ‘farmer’s” whole complaint—he has been unable to get the cheap labour he, expected to result from the depression, and in his rage takes b pot shot at the near-

est obstacle (the.4A scheme) purely out of malice. Apparently he fails to realise that farm hands accustomed to 355, 455, or even 50s are now lucky to be getting 20s to 30 per week, 4A scheme thrown in. It is obvious from his letter that some farmers are paying up to 15s a week over and above the subsidy, even in these hard times,.and after a normal year they would obviously be prepared to 1 / more. It is therefore hard to see where “Farmer” has procured his free labour from in the past, and where he would get it this year while his neighbours were prepared to pay wages —if only 15s. . . - The primary object, of this scheme is to keep the young men on the land. W hy, should “Farmer” discourage it? He must. be aware that he is entitled to benefit by the scheme if he signs a statement to the effect that he would not employ that labour under other circumstances, and it is up to him o convince the local committee of his bona tides, when he'can be sure of every consideration. , -■ If “Farmer” has been employing two men throughout that last season his total expenses must be fairly considerable, and it is hard to see how another £7 or £8 (enough to pay a man tor a couple of months this winter) spread over , the season would have been very hard to find. Even if he is having difficulty in making ends meet at the present time, “Farmer” would probably sooner be in his present position than to be working seven days a weekf or another farmer -with his food as his only reward. Finally, in his concluding paragraph “Farmer” appeals to the Government to save the scheme which builds, strong, physical, moral and mental soldiers.” I ask him does he honestly believe that “free labour” is the prescription to do it?—l am, etc., NO. 4A. June 16, 193Xf