The Waipukurau Press. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. THURSDAY, AUGUST 25, 1932. WHY NOT?

Waipukurau Press, Volume XXVIII, Issue 206, 25 August 1932, Page 4

The Waipukurau Press. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. THURSDAY, AUGUST 25, 1932. WHY NOT?

It has been the confident expectation of unemployed workers and all those interested in their welfare, also that of the State, that the standdown week, in terms of the Unemployment Board’s scheme of relief, would be abolished during the present winter. An announcement to this effect was made by the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates, Minister of Employ-. ment, on the eve of his departure for the Empire Economic Conference, and it is very disappointing to find that despite the quadrupled tax for the purpose of providing work for the thousands entitled to same, and the healthy position of the fund at the disposal of the Board, the promise has not been fulfilled. With commendable patience the men thus involved in an additional handicap to that of having obvious difficulty in making food ends meet —not to mention clothing, rent, and general needs —have faced the situation, but their complaisant attitude should not be taken too much for granted. In the circumstances prevailing, the majority of the men must find it difficult even to pay the quarterly levy of five shillings, which must be paid before they can receive any benefit in the way of work allocation. The hardship being faced by many men, and their families, cannot be lightly regarded—either from a humanitarian or an economic viewpoint. As we have previously pointed out the Government would be justified in view of the service being rendered to the country as a whole, as well as local bodies and primary producers in particular, in seeing that in due relationship the funds provided from wages, salary, and income sources are subsidised to an extent that would enable the unemployed to keep the wolf from the door of their homes, also pay a reasonable amount for rental or interest charges. If to the anticipated total of £3,500,000 were added approximately £1,000,000. from the general body of taxpayers, £500,000 local bodies, and £500,000 from employers of unemployed workers, then justice could be done to those immediately concerned as well as the Dominion. The amount involved only represents a cross-entiy in our national ledger, as the money would stimulate the purchase of local products and aid trade generally. The present fund is only sufficient to provide an average of £1 10s weekly to the workless man, say £2 to married and £1 single, all through the year. We like the sentiments of the Bishop of Waikatq: “I do not think the causes or the cure for the present depression are matters upon which anyone should dogmatise, said the Right Rev. C. A. Cherrington, when interviewed recently. One thing did appear to the Bishop to be of the utmost importance. It was the preservation of the married men s homes. His Lordship considered that to do this was a more imperative duty than even the provision of work for youths. Nothing, in his opinion, knocked the heart out of a man more than the fear that his home might be broken up. So far as the Bishop was concerned he would be content to pay double the present unemployment tax if he were assured it would prevent the fear of homes being broken up.” A GENEROUS RESPONSE With one week of its appeal to the public the Hawefa Citizens’ Relief

AN INDEPENDENT OUTLOOK A recent cablegram informs us the “New York Times”, in a leader entitled “Ottawa Uncertainties,” comments on the difficulty of completely envisioning the meaning of the technical aspects of the various arrangements at this time, but adds: “Yet there can be do doubt that a good deal has been done to bring about closei’ trade relations within the British Empire. The whole must be regarded as one further step by Britain away from the historic policy of free trade. It may prove that/she has done something to bind the Empire together, yet that losses elsewhere will over balance this gain.” This comment fairly summarises the position and is in keeping with that of the earlier comment of the “Times” which described the Ottawa / Economic Conference as having achieved a modest result in the interests of the Empire.