Local Bodies and the Unemployed

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Issue 127, 15 June 1937, Page 7

Local Bodies and the Unemployed

PATANGATA COUNTY

Sir,— -May I, through your paper, voice an almost universal protest, heard throughout the countryside, at the prpposal of the Government to saddle the ratepayers with a further burden of expense for the upkeep of the unemployed? The country this year, as a whole, will be taxed to the tune of something liko £5,000,000 for the benefit of those out of work. These figures, which are appjroximate, and may be exceeded but are unlikely to be mucli' less, work out at £143 per man (married and single included), If only the 19,864 on sustenance are considered, we get £250 per man. Either of these sums is a very handsome contribution, and if the Government in its unwisdom has barred the avenue to private employment, why should it call upon the local bodies — • that is, the ratepayers — to make good (and pay for) its deficienciesf Tho men on sustenance now are, to a very large extent, those who, under the No. 5 scheme, were for years ob« jects of derision, pottering about the roads, boiling their billies, smoking their pipes, and praying for a sprinlcling of rain so that they might quit the job. Their one topic of conversation was the Hnemployment Act, and never since time began has any Act been so sedulously studied or so systematically exploited. Any local body foreman will tell you that one of the happiest days of his life was when hc heard of Mr. Armstrong's decision to curtail, and finally to eliminate, the No. 5 scheme. Mr. Armstrong wanted the men on sustenance; he said so more than once. They are there now, and Mr. Webb, nowadays a mueh milder-mannered man than some of his colleagues, is overwhelmed at the demoralising spectacle. So are all of us, but there is more than a tinge of exasperation mixed with our sorrow. These men have been tried on a subsidised scheme and found wanting. Whatever works are put forward now will again be subsidised; and can anyone reasonably expeet a different result from the former experiment? The excuse made in the past was that the worlc in hand was made specially to fill a gap, and therefore it mattered not at all wliether progress was fast or slow. New works are again advocated on the old basis, and, call them what you will, they will still be only relief works, and on completion of the works the unomployed problem will be precisely as it is now. The local bodies should resolutely set I thcmselves against further taxation for relief purposes, and they will have the vast majority of their constituenls behind them. Cheap loan money may be offered, but borrowed money at any price is still a debt and must be re- ! paid. If tho assets created in its expendjture are non-productive (as jthey would be) the interest and sinking fund must come direct from the poclcets of the ratepayers. To some it may appear that I advocate allowing the unemployed to stew in their own juice. That is not so, but I certainly believe in the Government picking its own chestnuts out of the fire/ — Yours, etc.,

RATEPAYER. Otane, June 14, 1937.