WELLINGTON TOPICS

Hokitika Guardian, 19 October 1929, Page 6

WELLINGTON TOPICS

." THE RAILWAYS. » THEIR FUTURE. ‘ (Special Cori’espoiident.) WELLINGTON, Otcober 17. The Right Hon. J. G. Coates, the leader of the Reform Opposition, was on familiar ground and quite in his best form when discussing the Railways Statement in the House on Tuesdaq. Not that he devoted a great deal of attention to the Statement itseM. He rather discussed the potentialities of tlie railways than criticised their present administration. He was chivalrous, indeed, in suggesting that his successor in the direction of the Railway Department had not yet had time to make himself acquainted with all the intricacies of his task. Touching on the question as to whether there should he more “ politicalism ” or more “ commercialism ” in the management of the department, he plainly was on the side of “ commercialism ” and his recital of his observations in Canada gave weight and emphasis to his preference. It was easy to see that it was in this direction his inclination lay when he was shaping destiny of the railways himself and that it would continue as his policy were he in office again. MINISTER IN REPLY.

• In the course pf his reply in the early hours of. Wednestlay morning, 'the Hob; W. B. Taverner, the Minister of Railways, having'disposed of his smaller critics, turned quite sympathetically towards 'the Leader .of the Opposition and his policy of commercialism. “It seems to me,” he said, “ that in so far' a$ commercialism is synonmous with proper business methods it.is the right : course tp adopt. . . I think we should be sturdy enough to adopt business methods, wherever they are required The people are sufficiently intelligent to know business methods when they see them and to support, them. That is my view o'f commercialism and I don’t think it lacks definition.” Words to this effect from Mr Taverner mean a good deal" more than they do from some other sources, and it will not be surprising if the present Minister ventures a little ther towards commercialism than any of his predecessors 7 have ventured. Dunedin South has sent to Parliament a representative who dares to do things.

UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF. Mr W. Bromley, the president .of the Wellington Trades and'-Labour Council, does not credit the stories that are coming from Christchurch to the effect that men are being drawn from work in the country districts by the prospect of obtaining higher wages and less arduous tasks from the Government’s unemployed relief schemes. Though it was his business to look closely into the movements of labour he had no knowledge .iof men coming; into, 'the, city for the purpose of obtaining jobs under the relief scheme. “ The only danger I can see in connection with the scheme,” added Mr Bromley, “ is that of classing essential standard works as relief works for the purpose of paying something lower than the*' standard trade union rate of wages.’.’ This is a difficulty the officers administering Hie scheme already have encountered; but in most cases it has been overcome without any considerable, difficulty. Mr Bromley scoffs at the idea of workers already in employment moving into the towns to obtain relief jobs. NO REDUCTION.

Another view of unemployed relief was expressed by the Hon. It. Scott in the Legislative Council yesterday. This gentlemah, addressing the Hon. T. K. asked the Government whether, “in view of the economic condition of the Dominion and the urgent need for increased production, the time had not now arrived when the wages of single men employed by the Government on relief works should be immediately reduced in order to enable the primary' producers to obtain the assistance so urgently needed at this season of the year, the wages now being paid single men by the Government inducing farm employees to leave present employment in all parts of the Dominion.” Mr Sidey’s reply to the question was to the effeot that the Government did not think its unemployment relief scheme would induce farm workers to leave their present employment, and that as a matter of policy it did not propose to reduce tthe wages of single men. Mr Scott’s intentions were admirable, but his logic was a little defective.