15s AND 25s A WEEK

Hokitika Guardian, 14 February 1931, Page 5

15s AND 25s A WEEK

LATEST SCHEME. (By Tehijnrph —Per Press Association) NEW PLYMOUTH. February 13. Two new schemes of the Unemployment Board. Schemes No® and 4b were explained by Mr Smith (Minister of Labour!, to it he farmers' union and the North t'aracaui Unemployment Re. lief Committee in New Plymouth today. The schemes aim at absorbing un employed in productive work. “In addition to No. 5 scheme,” said Mr Smith, “the Board has brought out scheme 4a, by which it hopes to pin or a large number of men in the country for a longer time than if. can under N T o. 2 scheme. For the success of it's scheme it desires the co-opcration of the farm ers’ union. There are 80,000 farmers in New Zealand, of that number 30,000 are subject to land pax, and 4,000 had to provide income tax returns. The number 4a scheme, he said, the Board proposed >t,o nek farmers to take mer for work stumping, draining and fencing. and the Board would pay wages up to los a week for single men. and 25s a week for married men. The farmers to give the men “£1 and keep,” and if the men were worth it, to pay him a small wage as well. The Board believed that, in a week or two, it could place a very large, number of men with farmers. Under ,phe No. 4a scheme each farmer would have to sign a declaration that since September Ist, 1930. he had not discharg d any employees to take advantage of the benefits of the scheme. Workers could be engaged -for periods ranging from four to twenty-six weeks.

“If we can put 2,000 men on the land this winker,” said Mr Smith, “Tt will be much better for them to be in the country doing development work than staying in town. I hey will <• + least have a home, a winter job, and bo earning a little money. Under the 4b scheme' the Board intended to subsidise the farmer engaging men under the contract system up L o 33 1-3 per cent, w ith a limit to enc contract of £75. In those cases men would have to make their own arrangements as to accommodation and keep. The scheme would be bandied ,by the Commissioner of Crown Lands, whose rangers would keep m touch with the work and inspect the contracts. The banks had assured the Board they would support the farmers under this scheme, as it was really productive work. In the Labour Bureaux m Wellington and Auckland, said Mr Smith, h« had found a fine type of New Zealander with no home, no work, apd no job, thev were there in hundreds. Under this scheme it was hoped tc absorb these young men. Hundred? of decent, clean living men fount 1 themselves cut off from the occupatior tbev had been engaged in for perhaps 30 years. Skilled men who. never,, knew what is was to be without work now found themselves with nothing to do in a line of business, they might have saved money, or have a considerable equity of property, but lack of work had eaten their capital. Among numbers of -the 'unemployed were hun dreds of farmers who had been forced to leave their farms. What the Boarc 1 had done before Christmas had been merely matters of expediency, Mi Smith continued, and the Board had bad to disregard what i.fc intended tc make some of its guiding principles, go far as finding work was concerned, the schemes had been effective. The Board was unanimous .that- the sneces? of any scheme depended on economic value. The schemes must be consistent with a policy. Mr Smith said the schemes would come into operation immediately the farmers would apply tc the local Unemployment Committee, and be provided with carefully selected unemployed men. The farmer would not have lost anything. If a man were willing to accept los n week anc keep and housing, the farmer would have to hear the cost of insurance, which would he covered by the ordinary policy. That, most farmers had •taken, Mr Smith was assured the Farmers' Union would do all in its power to provide for development work on farms.