NO RESPITE

Hokitika Guardian, 8 January 1931, Page 3

NO RESPITE

EXPENDITURE ON RELIEF

AUCKLAND HOSPITAL BOARD’S POSITION.

AUCKLAND, Jan. 7

An noti being that the cost of outdoor relief for nine months of tlm current financial year bad exceeded the annual c-tiimite by £SOOO, with a prospect of this figure rising to £15,000 at the end of 41ie period, Mr W. Wallace, chairman of (the Auckland Hospital Board, in a. statement this morning, predicted that if the present state of affairs were allowed to continue the Unemployment Act would become an absolute farce. •• When the Unemiplodmonf Board was set up,” said Mr Wallace, “ I looked forward to the Hospital Board being relieved of the part it bad taken in dealing with unemployment relief, yet we have had no respite and. indeed, the claims have been even greater than they were before the Act came into operation. 1 say without hesitation that the question of unemployment must be dealt with as a national matter and not remain a question lor local taxation at all. It should no longer, now the Unemployment Board is functioning, be a charge on Hospital Boards. We fully expected that the Unemployment Board would relieve up entirely of the responsibility, but so far there has been no apparent let-up as far as claims on the Board arc concerned. Unless something definite is ,j .no 1 y bo Board nrcT Governmerit, w 0 will exceed our estimate for outdoor relief this year by a very huge amount, and if we are to continue as ■ve have been doing the Unemployment Act will prove an absolute farce.” COST OF BELIEF.

Mr Wallace paid that for the nnie months which ended on l)eeeml>er 31st the cost of outdoor relief amounted to *42.288, which was an excess of £SOOO on the estimated expenditure of *37,200 for the 12 months, and an increase of £10,031 on the expenditure for the corresponding period of 1929. “Each month.” he added. “ the excess is crowing. , The present state of affairs cannot go on. If we continue at the same, ratio of expenditure we w'H exceed the estimate for the vear bv c etween £12,000 and £15.000. this in 9r) ite of the so-called Unemployment Board. , ~ “So far as the Board is concerned. Mr Wallace concluded. “ its dut\ P quite clear. It cannot allow miHiculnrlv women a"d children, to starve. The Board will have to to si’Prilv the ordinary recess’iv's of life not matter where the money comes from.”