UNEMPLOYMENT LEVY

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 74, Issue 191, 14 August 1931, Page 7

UNEMPLOYMENT LEVY

P.P.A.’s REPLY TO MINISTER WELLINGTON, Aug. 12. In reply to the denial by the Minister of Labour (the Hon. 8. G. Bmith) iu the House of Representatives yesterday, that special privileges had been extended to the Roman Catholic Church, as claimed by the Protestant I’olitical Association, the Dominion secretary of the association made tho following statement to-day:— “The Hon. the Minister of Labour’s statement respecting special privileges extended to Marist Brothers under tho Unemployment Act is neither satisfactory nor convincing to the Protestants of this Dominion. He is aware that up to 12th June iast 70 per cent, of tho applications for exemption received by the department up to that time had come from Marist Fathers and Brothers. Will he inform the public how many ministers of tin* Anglican, Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, Congregational, an.l •Salvation Army have received exemption f Is he aware that many of the ministers of these denominations have given of their substance to aid distress and that many of them have impoverished themselves in so doing? Will he also say from which religious denomination came the first agitation to have the clause included in the Order-in-Council of 18th December, 1930, a clause evidently expressly designed to exempt only certain religious orders? “Whatever ecclesiastical vows those members of religious orders have taken, such are surely a. matter for their particular denomination and most certainly not tho concern of the State. The Catholic, Encyclopedia mentions at least two religious orders of the Roman Church in connection with vows of poverty. The public assumes that, for instance, the Marist. Fathers and Brothers arc well housed, well fed, well clothed; and they are now exempt from payment of the levy. How much more fortunate arc they than the man in tho street, unemployed, ill-fed, ill-clothed, and yet required by law to pay his por--1 tion of tho levy (should he be fortun- • ate enough to obtain employment other than relief work), from tho first instalment of his earnings? Ft would appear that, like the Nurses and Midwives • Amendment Bill passed in a previous session (which, as pointed out by the nurses of our public hospitals, jeopardises the standing and status of 5600 nurses), this regulation of tho Unemployment Act, by permitting exemption 1 to at least. 70 per cent, of one particular denomination, was designed to that end. ’ ’