UNEMPLOYMENT BOARD.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVII, Issue 19450, 27 March 1933, Page 4

UNEMPLOYMENT BOARD.

ISSUES conflicting INSTRUCTIONS. A WAIMATE RESOLUTION. At a meeting of the Waimate Local Unemployment Committee, a letter was received from the Unemployment Board containing instructions in regard to applications for relief work from men of small farm holdings. Six applications had been received from men so situated, and the Board's instructions in the letter to the Committee were found to be distinctly contrary to rhe directions issued to the Certifying Officer. Circular U.B. No. 207 to Local Unemployment Committees dated 21st January. 1933. after stating that it was very difficult to define what number of acres entails a worker or his wife being termed a farmer, stated that the guiding factcr should be that the property, when fully developed, will maintain the farmer. The circular continued: “If the property is fully developed and the income derived from it has been insufficient to provide for the worker without outside employment; or it is considered that an undeveloped property, even if brought into full use, will not support the worker apart from relief, then it should not be treated as a small farm; but in granting relief to workers who have such land from which some assistance can be obtained, it should be taken into consideration when determining the amount of relief to be given, which should be under Scheme 5 and not Scheme 4a “When relief is extended under the special provision of the 4a Scheme, a special application form (UB 17B), obtainable on application to this office, should be completed, the farmer signifying his acceptance at the foot of the form, and an arrangement made for somebody to control and inspect the work performed and issue the necessary certificates from time to time so that the subsidy payments may be lifted. If there is a Fields Inspector or a Stock Inspector resident in your district, you could perhaps get either of these officers to carry out this work, but failing this, perhaps your committee as a whole, or a member thereof, or some competent publicspirited citizen would voluntarily undertake to do this work.” Circular U.B. 198 Ato Certifying Officers, dated 2nd December 1932, reads as follows: ‘‘A query has arisen in regard to the correct interpretation of the third paragraph of Circular 196. The intention of the Board is that after 31st December, 1932, no person in occupation of farm lands (irrespective of whether the land is in the name of the farmer or his wife) shall himself be given relief under Scheme 5; each case may, however, be considered for assistance under Scheme 4a for work on his own property.” Mr Dash said that the members of the Committee were acting in an honorary capacity. and it would be practicably impossible for any member to spare the time and bear the expense necessary to carrying out the periodical inspections as stipulated. The amount of work involved also would be something enormous. Mr Brown said that the amount of work involved did not enter into the position at all. If his own instructions meant increasing his work by 100 per cent, he was going to carry it out. and if he thought a man should be granted relief under Scheme 4a he would make that recommendaton. and the man would be put on to the 4a Scheme, as his decision as Certifying Officer would be final. The chairman said that he would again point out that the members of the Committee were honorary workers who were acting in an advisory capacity. They could not consider running round as suggested by the Board, inspecting the work done throughout the district on small holdings. They would advise the Board to the very best of their ability, what they considered the best course to pursue in the interests of the country as a whole, having special regard as to how Government money could be applied to advantage. From what the speaker could see they would only be in a position to recommend sufficient for the barest necessities for the unemployed during the coming winter. After a thorough discussion by the Committee, of the surrounding circumstances of the six applications before them. Mr Dash moved:— “That in the considered opinion o* this Committee, it is impossible to carry out the conditions laid down in Circular UB No. 207. Re 198 and 198 A. as voluntary inspection is impossible, and it is not practicable for this Committee to adjudicate in the matter of the desirability of giving such assistance as is provided for, we believe that the least costly method and the most resultful is to deal with small landholders under Scheme 5 according to the needs of the individual.” The motion was carried unanimously, and it was decided to send a copy to the Unemployment Board.