BOARD CRITICISED

Evening Post, Volume CXVIII, Issue 89, 12 October 1934, Page 11

BOARD CRITICISED

TAX ON ALLOWANCE

CITY MAKES IT UP

COUNCILLORS SURPRISED

The action of the Unemployment Board in deducting, from amounts received by relief workers, the wages tax upon the additional amount contributed by the City Council under its scheme to assist tho men under the rotation plan (one month in work and one month on sustenance) was sharply criticised at last night's meeting of the City Council. In reply to Councillor P. Eraser, M.P., tho Mayor (Mr. T. C. A. Hislop) said that the question of tho tax upon tho additional payment had been raised to him and he had1 given instructions that the council should make up the small amount involved, so that the men would not lose. His action would, of course, require to be confirmed by the council. Councillor C. H. Chapman, M.P., said that several relief workers had approached him with complaints that they were now not getting the same income over two months as previously, the difference being Is to Is 6d per week. It wa3 the intention of the council that the new scheme should not interfere with the amounts received by the men. Mr. Hislop said that he would be glad to hoar of specific cases, which would be inquired into at once by the special committee. Some figures had been published, but they did not tako the milk ration into consideration 'and so were incorrect. Councillor E, McKeen, M.P., suggested that someone should be detailed to make explanations, for there were bound to be many misunderstandings during tho early application of the scheme. Some men had previously been getting a milk ration, and they would not be so well off, said Councillor Eraser. COUNCIL SHOULD REFUSE. Councillor P. M. Butlor said that the Wellington City Council was one of the very fow,-if not the only one, of the local bodies in New Zealand which deducted the tax from the little that the relief worker got. When the council gave an additional 7d the Unemployment Board imposed a tax of a penny, and the council was now making it up to Bd. The board was being "pretty mean about it," and it meant that the city was paying a premium for trying to give some further relief to the unemployed. He knew of one local body that had refused absolutely to deduct the tax, and'the Audit Department had winked at it, as any reasonable man, or department, would. The citizens of Wellington were paying through the unemployment tax, through, the rates, and through the electricity department to keep the relief works going, and on top of that were paying again to make up to the men what the Unemployment Board required to be deducted from the few pence of extra money given to the men. Councillor W. Appleton: Won't the Government refund it? Councillor H. A. Huggins: No, they will not. Councillor Butler: They don't refund anything paid, rightly or wrongly, in taxes. Councillor Appleton: It should be refunded by the Unemployment Board; the city should not have to pay. The Mayor said that as the law stood the tax had to bo paid, but he thought that representations should be made in the matter. . • Councillor Butler mentioned a case of a relief worker who had met with an. accident while on a relief job and had to stand aside with a poisoned hand. The amount paid to him was Ss 9d per week, so that he was considerably worse off than if he had been on sustenancei

Mr. Hislop said that a previous similar case had been adjusted when representations were made to the board, and no doubt some adjustment could bo made in this ease.