MONEY RETURNED

Waipukurau Press, Volume XXVIII, Issue 206, 25 August 1932, Page 2

MONEY RETURNED

—<§> A CHRISTCHURCH PROBLEM IN RELATION TO RELIEF Since April 1 a sum of £2 300 allocated to Christchurch by the Unemployment Board has been returned to Wellington owing to the money not being expended by any local body. A statement that the City Council’s practice of subsidising relief rates had prevented that sum being spent in Christchurch was made by Councillor E. H. Andrews at the meeting of the council recently. The statement was contradicted by the Mayor (Mr D. G. Sullivan, M.P.) and Councillor J. M’Combs, and an explanation of the position was made by Councillor J. W. Beanland. Councillor Andrews said that the £2 300 could have provided work for many more men. He questioned whether the council could not employ men without giving a subsidy on wages. It was necessary to make a strong effort to employ more men, or the city’s allocation from the board might be reduced if part of it were regularly returned to Wellington. The Mayor: I don’t think that has anything to do with the subsidy question. That is another matter. Councillor Andrews: I believe I am right in saying that the two matters are closely connected. I am in possession of the facts, and I take it that the council cannot find the amount of the subsidy to employ more men. Councillor J. M’Combs, M.P.,: You “take it.” You should find out. The Mayor stated that on the only occasion which the council had been asked to employ more men, it had done so. Councillor Beanland explained that a rule of the Unemployment Board had been that when a local body overspent its allocation it had to pay

the difference.

A denial of the statement that the money had been returned because the council could not find the amount of its usual subsidy was given by Councillor J. M’Combs. The board now realised its mistake in insisting on the rule concerning over-spending of the allocation, and had rescinded the rule. The position was created through a wrong policy of the board.