HOUSE DISCUSSES PUBLIC WORKS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18581, 2 October 1928, Page 9

HOUSE DISCUSSES PUBLIC WORKS.

MANY SPEAKERS REFER TO UNEMPLOYMENT. Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, October 1. In the House of Representatives this afternoon the Prime Minister moved that the House go into Committee of Supply to consider the Public Works Estimates. On this question Mr Parry began a discussion on unemployment which, he said, was becoming a malignant growth on the body politic. There were more men out of work to-day than there were a few months ago, and what the Government had done to relieve the situation was practically negligible. There were men starving, and nothing was being done to give them relief. He quoted instances reported in the Press, for details of which he could not vouch, but he was perfectly sure that the method employed of registering and tabulating the unemployed was totally misleading, the Dominion’s quota being far greater than the official figures of one in 375.

Mr Wilford said that everyone sympathised with the unemployed, and he suggested that Ministers, heads of Departments and local bodies should get together and evolve some general scheme of employment.

Mr Bartram chided the Government with not having pushed on with the Morningside railway work, which would have given work to a large number of Auckland’s unemployed. He contended that unemployed should be paid full rates for work done, and he resented a paragraph in the Public Works Statement that public works should not be made a dumping ground for unemployed. The Hon K. S. Williams said he had been urged to open public works to all and sundry, but there was another side to that question. They had men who were permanently employed on public works, and these men should be protected against an invasion oi all and sundry on standard works It was not possible to employ everyone on the public works ot the Dominion, but a great deal could be done by general cooperation of private employers. Mr H. G. R. Mason (Eden) wanted to know why there had been so much delay in settling the dispute regarding the Arapuni power house with the contractors, and whether the contractors subsequently accepted less than they originally demanded. Mr Armstrong said that the share of petrol tax allocated to the cities was nothing like a “fair deal.” To that extent he did not think the Public Works Statement put the position accurately. The Public Works Department had not done anything like its share.in providing work for the unemployed, and those men they had engaged had been employed at a starvation rate of pay. Sir Joseph YVard said the Prime Minister should tell the House what limit be considered should be placed on public works expenditure this year Some of the figures in the Public Works Statement seemed to him staggering. He was greatly concerned about it. It was huge, and he doubted the ability of the country to stand the strain. Mr Fraser complained that when permanent employees of the Public Works Department asked the Minister to review the agreement under which they were working he turned them down flatly, and not a single increase asked for was granted. Moreover, the Department was not paying recognised tradesmen award rates, and even that reasonable request was refused. There was also a grievance about annual leave. There was a feeling that the co-operative system was now being used by.the Department to exploit the men, for the harder the men worked, and the larger the wage they earned, it provided an excuse for the engineers to reduce the rates at which the work was done. In that allegation there was a case for the Department to answer, and he hoped that an answer would be given at once, because there was now general dissatisfaction with the co-operative system, whereas a few years ago it was a system which the workers preferred. Mr Hudson and Mr Seddon discussed the Public Works Statement from local points of view. Mr M’Keen condemned the prevalence of unemployment. The Government had lamentably failed to solve this problem, and had lost their opportunity, for they would not have another chance after November next. The Hon A. D. M’Leod admitted that there had been a certain amount of unemployment in the Dominion, but not more than three had been in other democratic countries. There was no golden rule by which this problem could be settled, and in its settlement the Government had shown more practical sympathy than those sitting on the Opposition benches. Sir John Luke expressed the opinion that although our hydro-electric schemes were at present doing away with much old-fashioned machinery, so displacing many employees, when the whole of the schemes became linked up they would make a great improvement in the earning power of the Dominion.

Mr Veitch said the cure for unemployment was a change of Government. The weakness of our present position was that no industrial system was being developed into which men engaged on public works could be absorbed. The Hon R. A. Wright denied that the wages of men engaged on co-oper-ative work W’ere being reduced by public works engineers. Such a statement was a libel on reputable men, who had no instructions to reduce wages, and who would not do so on their own initiative. The Government was not taking advantage of unemployment to get cheap labour on public works. The fact was that unemployment was here, and no Government in the world had done more successfully to cope with it. The Leader of the Opposition said one of the most prolific causes of unemployment was the bringing-out of hundreds of immigrants to a labour market already overstocked by our own people. It was for this reason that the Opposition attacked the immigration policy of the Government. The Hon O. J. Hawken said that if men were unemployed it was first-hand evidence that their employers could not afford to pay them the wages they demanded. This was the result of the Court fixing high wage awards. If a merchant could not sell his goods he must reduce prices to meet the market, and the same thing applied to labour. He did not advocate reduction of wages, but he did advocate greater production, and in inducing men to do t«is the Labour Party had as much responsibility as the Government had. Mr J. A. Lee (Auckland East) declared that out of an expenditure of eight millions on public works, the Government was finding a quarter of a million out of revenue, whereas the old Liberal Government used to provide eight hundred thousand out of a total expenditure of two millions, which was a much better performance, for revenue in the old Liberal days was only a fraction of what it is to-day. There was a million of money lying in the Main Highways fund, which should be used in giving employment to unemployed. Mr Dickie disagreed with the last speaker. The Highways Board could

not profitably spend money on roadmaking in the winter months, for to do so would simply mean wearing out one road to make another.

Mr Bell (Bay of Islands) advocated tapering off on the railway building policy, and extension of building good motor roads, on which people could travel 365 days in the year. The Prime Minister said he believed there was a responsibility on the part of the Government to deal with the unemployed problem, but so far no permanent solution had been found. The recent Industrial Conference discussed it from every angle. A gTeat deal of information had been obtained and was being prepared for further investigation by the committee which would be set up as soon as employers and employees could give the Government the men they wanted. The only remedy suggested by the Opposition was unemployment insurance. He had no hesitation in saying that what the Government had done was of far greater benefit to the workers than any unemployed insurance tried in any part of the world. No one wanted to reduce wages, but what was wanted was more production during times of depression, and we could go on producing wool, meat, butter, cheese and other primary products to any extent without affecting to the slightest extent the world’s markets. He did not favour relying on pick and shovel work as means of employing young New Zealanders. They ought to be absorbed in our industries. He also admitted that it was not at present pursuing an immigration policy, but it was a wise man who could forsee difficulties. Certainly members of the Opposition did not forsee the difficulties which had arisen, he defended the extension of the Roto-rua-Taupo railway on the ground that without it a great area of farming and timber country could not be developedSo far as the South Island lines were concerned they had listed the lines in order of urgency, and were now engaged in filling up gaps, so as to unite disunited sections, into complete systems. As one section was completed the men were being drafted on to other sections, and no one had done more to give those men good conditions than he had. One of the most vital problems dealt with in the Public Works Statement was the extraordinary development of roads and the economic effect it was likely to havte on railways. That demanded a solution and the Government had definite ideas as to how it should be settled. On one point they were agreed, arid that was that charges in this connection should not be thrown back upon the land. IN COMMITTEE. The House then went into Committee of Supply to consider Estimates. On the first item Mr Fraser moved to reduce it by £1 as an indication that the Public Works camps were unsatisfactory. On a division the amendment was defeated by 30 to 11. On the item, Locomotives constructed in the United Kingdom, £45,000, Mr Veitch moved to reduce the vote by £1 as an indication that the engines should be built in New Zealand. The Prime Minister explained that three of the engines were Garratt locomotives for the main trunk line, which would take a train right through from Wellington to Auckland. These engines could not be built in New Zealand because of patent held by the makers. The remainder of the engines were electrical locomotives for the Lyttelton tunnel. When the new railway workshops were completed he anticipated that this type of engine could be constructed here. On a division the amendment was defeated by 31 votes to 9. VOTES FOR £8,753,500 PASSED IN THREE HOURS Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, October 2. After the Telegraph Office closed discussion on the Public Works Estimates was continued. Members of the Labour Party strongly attacked the vote for immigration, contending that before more public school boys were brought to the Dominion provision should be made to give New Zealand boys a chance to obtain education in farming. These arguments were replied to by several Government supporters, who said that if the Empire spirit was a living thing we had no right to object to have our population increased by recruits from the British Isles. The vote was finally agreed to without division. In three hours votes totalling £5,753,500 were passed and progress was reported. The House rose at 3.10 a.m. till 2150 p.m. i