THE UNEMPLOYMENT ACT.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 20098, 29 November 1930, Page 19

THE UNEMPLOYMENT ACT.

TO THE EDITOK OT THE PRESS r j—Was ever an Act of Parliament imposed upon the people of any country with such an utter lack of information as to its provisions and conditions as the Unemployment Act? Tho whole country is in a maze about it. Information is now and then given by the Press, the Ministers, and now by the Unemployment Board, but the trouble is that for any clear, definite statement, an equally authoritative and official statement is given in direct contradiction of the first.

For example, I, as a worker, unemployed for months, am most concerned with the payment of the unemployment 'evy. I have not earned a shilling for those months. I am living on the charity of the Salvation Army in their Home at Addington, along with nearly 200 men like myself. We simply cannot pay the first instalment. We have not got it. Are we then to be debarred from the dole! If we are, it will mean that the United Government, while pretend ing to help the unemployed, is imposing an impossible condition, which will make their pretended gift a cruel hypocrisy, by penalising the most needy of nil for their poverty—which they cannot help. It holds out the dole and then erects a barrier which the most needy of the unemployed cannot get across. But how are we going to reconcile those two official statements? In The Press to-day, we read this in the report of the meeting of the Unemployment Board: "It is pointed out by the Board that the benefits of the Act are extended only to contributors to the Unemployment Fund. This means that unless a man pays the levy he cannot receive sustenance."

So much for that. How does it tally with this statement in the Levy Book, issued to all who are liable to contribute to the fund? "Any person who, on the due date of any instalment of levy, and for at least one month thereafter, is an inmate of . . . any public or private charitable institution established for the relief of ... needy persons .... shall be exempt from the payment of that instalment of the levy." Does that mean that the exemption carries with it the exclusion of the exempted from the dole? And, if it

docs, why does the Act not say sol Further, where were tho Labour members when this outrageously obscure measure was passed'? Surely they might have exacted better treatment for tho most needy of all, for they held—and hold —the Government at their mercy, ana can exact what they want —or turn the Government out. If these neediest of all are to be excluded, the Act is a cruel farce. Porhaps another Act must bo passed to explain the present Act, which, with its confusion and bewildering contradictions, is a sorry testimoninl to the commonsense of tho House that passed it. —Yours, etc., A SON OF TOIL. November 2-Stli, 1930. io TUB EDITOB OF THE J'BES>S. ■Sir, —I have done only ono month's work this year, have no income whatsoever, am living with relatives; and yet, because I cannot possibly pay the first instalment of the Unemployment levy, tho Hoard refuses to assist a caso like mine. To pass this Act what a lot of intellectual legislators wo must have! The Hoard undertakes to either provide work or pay sustenance allowance; now could not the first instalment, ho deducted from either the first week's or the first sustenance allowance:"'—Yours, etc., UXEMI'LOVKD. \oven,!.or L'Sth. 1930.