RELIEF SCHEMES

Hokitika Guardian, 27 March 1931, Page 2

RELIEF SCHEMES

NO INJUSTICE DONE BY BOARD.

WELLINGTON, March 25

“There appears to be some misconception with regard to Hie Unemployment Board’s responsibilities toward farmers who have been adversely affected by the stamp in the prices of primary products,” states ,the chairman of the Board (Hon. S. G. Smith).

“At a meeting of the Auckland Provincial Executive of the Farmers’

Union the statements were made that ‘although many farmers were in desperate need they were not allowed to obtain employment under the Unemployment Board’s relief schemes’; and ‘it was a great injustice that farmers who paid the uimmployment levy were not able to benefit.’

“Similarly, it was asserted at a meeting of the Manakau County Council that ‘the Unemployment Board seems to he encouraging farmers to walk off the land. At the same time I know for a fact that there are men in the city registered as unemployed and receiving assistance who have considerable property and are receiving rents. In other cases men being given employment have large banking accounts.’ A SERIOUS PROBLEM. “The board has the utmost sympathy with farmers in the position outlined above, and realises that the problem of relieving distress in such cases is a very serious one,” said the Minister, “but it lias to be remembered that its primary function, according to the Act,, is to endeavour to provide employment for the' unemployed wage-earner, If a man owns or has an interest in a farm, but regularly works for wages throughout the year, lie ia eligible for relief work; but a man who lives and works on his farm cannot be regarded as unemployed—however serious hjs finajp cial position may be. He has a home, and the farm will surely provide a certain amount of food. Such farmers are outside the scope of the Un('mpployment Act, and it is suggested that if payment of any instalment of the levy would impose a hardship upon them they should apply to the board for exemption from payment, CASES OF ABUSE.. “With regard to the allegation that the relief schemes ar e being abused, any person having such knowledge should report the facts to the board i or the nearest Local Unemployment | Committee. A circular to Local Un-j employment Committees covered this point in the. following terms:—“lf a committee has knowledge that a person has private resources sufficient to support him lie should not be given work. In doubtful cases, where actual information cannot be obtained, it is suggested that a man be required to make a statutory declaration as to his means.” “It will therefore be seen,” concluded the Minister, “that however reluctant the board is to refuse help, there is no injustice in excluding fanners from the relief schemes, and that the board is taking all reasonable precautions to ensure that ineligible men shall not he given employment.”