The Daily News SATURDAY, JUNE 22, 1935. UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF.

Taranaki Daily News, 22 June 1935, Page 6

The Daily News

SATURDAY, JUNE 22, 1935. UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF.

OFFICES t NEW PLYMOUTH. Currl* Strcoi. STRATFORD, Broadway. RAWER A, High Street :

It seems evident that the Unemployment Board is beginning to realise that the No. 5 Unemployment Scheme must receive considerable amendment if it is to continue to receive the hearty co-operation of local governing bodies. The statement in regard to that plan made by the deputychairman of the board, Mr. W. Bromley, on Thursday, was rather an explanation of the ■ board’s attitude towards the scheme than an indication of a ; new national policy in. regard to i a general policy for recovery. On i Mr. Bromley’s own showing, it i is essential that such a policy should commend itself to local administrative bodies, and other employers of labour, for, as he points out, under existing legislation the board can'function as an employing authority only to a vej;y limited extent. It can promote employment by others, this being, indeed, the purpose for which it was created. The No. 5 scheme was admittedly an experiment. The same, can be said of most of the measures taken for the relief of unemployment since it became recognised that- the problem was more than a temporary economic disorder, for, the board had little . experience or precedence for its guidance. Local: bodies are finding the cdst toorheavy, or that it .:isV:dififlcult to find suitable .works.v'Some, of them have declared’for a straight out dole in preference.;to. the, No, 5 scheme, others again-that it is-the duty of the State to. iprovide work at “standard’’" wages, for all who seek it, Mr. Bromley was justified in > calling-attention to the dangers of a general dole, and the suggestion that the State must find employment for all. is beyond practicability. This does not imply'that a definitet plan of recovery ds equally ' impracticable. - The Minister, the Hon, .S. G. Smith, has given hints of ; his intention to initiate anjF encoiitr age fresh, efforts likely to have a permanently reconstructive value, .hut he ds, quite - wisely, taking time to inquire and consider “what form those efforts should take. Mr. Jones, a imember of the Executive Commission of Agriculture, threw out a hint the other day that some assistance for dairy farmers might be available by,co-operation between the commission and the Unemployment Board, but the problem demands broader treatment than that of deciding whether tar-sealing a street is maintenance or new work suitable for relief labour, or whether sustenance is preferable, from the point of view of the local authority, to the No., 5 scheme. The easy way is ‘being urged upon the Government by many people. Raise the rates of pay for relief work and for sustenance, they say, and the trouble will end. The solution is not quite so simple even were the money available, which, unfortunately is not the case. The Minister must dig deeper for good foundations upon which to 'build definite economic recovery. He must resist any plan that involves the grant of a dole without a return in the shape of labour except in special circumstances. He must scrutinise very meticulously also any proposals for all round increases in relief pay lest the benefit be applied .to those who need it least as well as to those whose responsibilities give grounds for more assistance, besides having no lasting reconstructive effect. Relief work and sustenance are only palliatives. The only curative agent for unemployment is the provision of work. Mr. Smith’s inquiries should include examination of all that is hindering such provision. Does the fault lie in a top-heavy and overexpensive system .of local government? What is hindering

the use of capital in local industries? Are such matters as tariffs, the exchange rate, mortgage legislation and other debatable issues proving the real stumbling block to recovery, and if so in what way can remedy be sought? A reply to the last of tliese questions will not be found in a mere extension of the Uneihployment Board’s duties or of the funds placed at its disposal. The co-operation of local authorities and of all employers of. labour is essential, and it must be welded into, a national policy. At present the tendency by local authorities is towards diverse and even conflicting policies, the only point in common being apparently -that the board should provide more ■ money for relief. That would entail increased taxation for very doubtful benefit.