The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. TUESDAY, JULY 31, 1928. RELIEVING UNEMPLOYMENT

Hokitika Guardian, 31 July 1928, Page 2

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. TUESDAY, JULY 31, 1928. RELIEVING UNEMPLOYMENT

As in New Zealand, so at Home, it ie. to be feared that the workless workers of Britain will get little consolation out of the debate in Parliament on unemployment. Mr Ramsay MacDonald’s resolution deploring “the inadequacy of the measures taken by the Government to deal with the tragic national problem of unemployment’’ provided an opportunity for a spirited little skirmish on party lines, but its defeat by a large majority was a foregone conclusion. For, quite apart from the ties of party 1 allegiance, nobody believes that Conservatives are wholly responsible for unemployment, or that any other Government or party, which might replace them could provide offhand an effective remedy for this grave national disorder. Certainly, if we are to judge by the contributions of Mr MacDonald, Mr Snowden and Mr Wheatley to this debate, the Labour Party is just as ill-supplied with effective proposals for the relief of unemployment as its opponents. There is no particular fault to be found with Mr Baldwin’s statement of his case. Unemployment is widespread, but, though serious, it is “local and confined.” Therefore Mr Baldwin argues that it should be possible to transfer surplus labour from the depressed areas to the districts where trade is active, and employment comparatively plentiful. This is the remedy discussed at length by the Transference Board. But neither the Board nor the Prime Minister appear to have considered in detail the immense practical difficulties in the way of any such solution of the problem. It is true that, in spite of unemployment, the country as a whole seems to be recovering some measure of industrial and commercial prosperity and the scheme for relief from taxation, should enable employers, whether individuals or corporate bodies, to ease the situation hy opening up further opportunities and facilities for the workers. Mr Baldwin evidently attaches importance to this aspect of the case, and he also maintains that something can be done by carefully organised emigration. But he also realises the difficulties that the Dominions already have to face in regard to their congested labour markets, and the strong opposition to influx of labour. On the whole, then, there is |ittle in the yay pf constructive policy

to be found in Mr Baldwin’s speech, savs an exchange, which is inclined to sympathise with the critics who lioin time to time protest against the Prime Minister’s complacent but somewhat barren and uninspiring optimism. Mr MacDonald’s nostrum ol “development works’’—our old friend “relief works” in a thin disguise—-is obsolete and futile; -.i;r Snowden’s vitriolic description of Mr Baldwin’s effort as “a miserable exhibition” is not exactly helpful; and Mr Wheatley’s demand for an income-tax of 20s in the £ above a certain level of exemption, and full wages for the unemployed does not strengthen one’s confidence in Labour's common sense or self-control. It is to be feared that British workers can look only to the gradual ancl painful processes of economic evolution to meet their needs and Parliaments are slow to assist matters by this surer means.