RATIONS ABOLISHED.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXIV, Issue 941, 11 December 1933, Page 8

RATIONS ABOLISHED.

Unemployment Committee Protests. The Citizens’ Unemployment Relief Committee passed a resolution this morning regretting the action of the Unemployment Board with regard to sustenance grants, reducing the amount in some cases and abolishing it altogether in others. In view of the hardship this would cause, the committee made an urgent request to the board to review the position and reinstate the grants. The matter was introduced by the Rev F. T. Read with the receipt of a letter from one relief worker stating that he had been receiving 5s a week rations. Last Monday the amount was reduced to 3s 6d, which he considered hard, as the 5s unemployment levy had to be met out of 25s wages. On the following Thursday he was told there w'ould be no more rations. He was suffering from diabetes and required special diet costing from 10s to 12s a week.

Mr Read said that the hardship fell greatest on the men with two or three children.

Mr George Harper seconded the motion moved by Mr Read. The motion was supported by Mr W. E. Leadley, w r ho said the family allowance was available only to those with more than two children. Mr J. W. Beanland said it seemed particularly hard that the rations should be interfered with just at this time of the year. Mr Read and Mr Leadley were delegated to draft the letter to the board. COUNTRY ALLOCATIONS. Inadequacy of Relief Under No. 5 Scheme. The amount of the allotment of labour under the No. 5 scheme for the country districts of Canterbury was the subject of a complaint to the Citizens’ Unemployment Relief Committee this morning. A motion was passed asking the Unemployment Board to review the position to bring it to a more just and equitable basis. The Rev F. T. Read said he had received letters from two country districts, Southbridge and Dunsandel, where the men were receiving very little work. It was a matter for general complaint. Mr W. E. Leadley said the matter was a policy one from the point of view of the board. Mr F. W. J. Belton asked if the fault was to be laid entirely at the door of the board or on local bodies that had not made full use of their allocations, which had consequently’ been reduced. Mr J. W. Crampton said it was a fallacy' to hold that there was more chance of a man obtaining work in the country than in the towns.