CORRESPONDENCE “RECEIVED”

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVII, Issue 19835, 26 June 1934, Page 8

CORRESPONDENCE “RECEIVED”

PALMERSTON NORTH UNEMPLOYED

SUSTENANCE SCHEME At a recent meeting of the Timaru Borough Council, discussion ensued regarding a letter from the Mayor of Palmerston North giving an outline of the proceedings of a public meeting concerning the proposed sustenance scheme. The Council deferred decision until further information in the matter was procured. At last night’s meeting of the Council, the Mayor (Mr T. W. Satterthwaite) said that correspondence had been received from the Mayor of Palmerston North and the Minister of Employment. He thought councillors would agree aftey hearinv the correspondence, that no further action was necessary. Letter From Minister. The Minister of Employment (Hon. A. Hamilton) wrote stating that thePalmerston North City Council proposed to carry out certain works for the relief of unemployment, with the aid of assistance from the Unemployment Board. When these proposals were submitted to the ratepayers they declined to agree to any further commitments involving capital expenditure, and the utilisation of unemployed labiur. This resulted in the inability of the local authorities to provide sufficient relief work for all the registered unemployed. In order to avoid dislocation, it was arranged that the men for whom no work could be provided, approximately 25 per cent., should stand down each week and be granted a sustenance allowance similar to what was provided in the four main cities when work was not available. Under this arrangement no worker, however, was required to stand down for more than one week in four. With the stand-down period included, the unemployed of Palmerston North were still on as good an allocation as most places where the nature of the sur • rounding country and the circumstances generally were similar. The allocation in Palmerston North was about the best outside of the four main cities, the Minister stating that he mentioned this as an indication that that centre had been receiving its fair share. Cr. H. J. Mathers moved and Cr. P. B. Foote seconded that the correspondence be received. In reply to a question by Cr. P. C. Vinnell, Cr. Mathers said that a married man with a wife and one child in this district received 2£ days a week, at 25/- a week. Cr. Vinnell: No stand-down week? Cr. Mathers: Oh, yes. Motion Carried. Cr. Vinnell quoted from a letter received from Palmerston North, indicating that a married man, with no children, received £4 a month. During the stand-down week, there was no work, so the men were asked to accept 10/- a week, which was half what the ordinary working man would receive. Cr Vinnell denied the statement by the Minister that men on capital works were not stood down, the letter, from which Cr. Vinnell quoted, instancing both the Hospital Board and the Rivers Board, where men had been stood down. The Mayor said that the statements had been made by a Minister of the Crown and it was pretty hard to say that they were incorrect. Cr. Mathers pointed out that the trouble was between the Palmerston North City Council and the Unemploymen Board, not the Hospital Board and the Rivers Board. Cr. Vinnell said that the original letter had come from the Mayor following a public meeting. Were they sufficiently snug in Timaru to say that they were going to take no notice of the position in Palmerston North? If he stood al ne, he would protest against the matter. Cr. Benstead also opposed the motion in the light of additional information received by Cr. Vinnell. The motion was defeated by five votes to four, the voting being:—For: The Mayor and Crs. W. H. Hall. H. J. Mathers, P. B. Foote and F. B. Hawkey. Against: Crs. G. Benstead, W. G. Tweedy, A. G. Foster and P. C. Vinnell.