LEWIS PASS CAMP.

Star (Christchurch), Volume XLIV, Issue 539, 23 August 1932, Page 12

LEWIS PASS CAMP.

Engineer Replies to Mayor’s Statements. NOT POVERTY-STRICKEN. Exception to the statement made by the Mayor, Mr D. G Sullivan, M.P., that the Public Works Department camp for single unemployed at Lewis Pass is the most poverty-stricken he had yet seen, was taken by Mr F. Langbein, District Public Works Engineer, replying yesterday to Mr Sullivan’s comment on the general situation in the camp. “I see no reason why the camp should be referred to as poverty-stricken,” said Mr Langbein “Ifit is povertystricken because the men have no wireless set or tobacco, then it is not poverty-stricken in a Government sense, for those things are not provided by the Government. Mr Sullivan admits himself that the tent accommodation is quite good, and there is a good cookhouse.” Mr Langbein said that there should be no complaints about the food. The camp had been in operation about a month, and the food supplied was as good as that at the Hill Top or any other camp. The Department was tied down by the amount of 10s per week allowed for the feeding of the men, and this did not permit of luxuries, but the food was good and of sufficient quantity. “ I spoke to a man who had been in the camp from the' start and he said that anyone who complained at the food deserved to be shot,” said Mr Langbein. “ Regarding Mr Sullivan’s fear that the men will not earn on an average more than five shillings a week, the five gangs which worked the full time made rates from 7s 8d to 13s 5d per week. The average was 10s lid per week. The men were divided into seven gangs. One which had been employed in camp erection was paid the full 10s per week, while the second, which had been working only a few days, was given progress pay at the rate of 10s per week. In the face of this the men’s fears are not quite justified.” Payment for Clothing. Mr Langbein said that opportunities existed for the men to purchase clothing through the Department. Boots, blankets, underwear, tunics, trousers and hats could be purchased at cost price with no overhead charge. The prices were reasonable. The matter of saving for this clothing presented no 'lifficulty, because as the majority of the men were on a low scale of wage, it had been decided to allow repayment to take place over a period extending up to three months. As for the question of tobacco, books ind cards, the onus was not on the Department to supply them, and the sum allowed for the running of the camps did not leave a very wide margin.