WORK REVIEWED

Hokitika Guardian, 17 May 1932, Page 3

WORK REVIEWED

PROVISION FOR UNEMPLOYED

INTRODUCTION OF SCHEMES

Unemployment in New Zealand did not become a problem ot serious pioportions until tlie latter pai't of tobJ ; although for several years • previously the number of workless persons' had been growing steadily. On Nova in bo. 24, 1930, there were 7402 registered unemployed in the Dominion, but b,\ March 30, 1931, the- total-had grown’ to 38,028. Since then the registration-, have increased to about 50,000,' ana for the past year, the total l as Huctuat ed round that figure, sometimes; being slightly lower and stun, times sliglitl. higher. One explanation of the extraordinary increase in the registrations betwe.i. the end of 1930 and the end of March, 1931, is that in that period the Unemployment Act was passed and .provision was made for the unemployed on "an organised scale. Unemployment : became a subject of considerable discussion in 1926 and in that year additional men were placed on public works' to relieve the position. A good deal was done by committees of private: citizen!--in the direction of providing work at standard rates of pay, but, chiefly because of the small amount’ of work offering at the Government." 'labour bureaux, the number of registrations did not increase to any great extent.

Government Relief Rat-.s. Mr Coates, when Prime Minister, pro vided payments for relief works on tinbasis of 9-s a day for single. mep and 12s for married men. These rates oi pay became an important issue in tin general election .in 1928, ■ when the Coates Government was defeated, and the United Party, under the leadership of the late Sir Joseph Ward, took office.

The United Party promised durim the election a-empaign to take steps t find a solution of the unemployment problem, and Sir Joseph Ward prompt ly raised the rates of pay of relie 1

workers to 14s a da-v. Subsequently be gave an undertaking that work would he found foe* every able-bodied unemployed man within one lnoiyth and this promise was kept. However, t-lie number of unemployed continued to increase- and it was evident, during the session of 1930, that more adequate provision was needed to epp'e with the situation. ...... The Unemployment Act- was .passed in October. 1930, bein''- the direct out come of the deliberations of a special committee annointed bv the Government on October 17. 1928 and Fibril m-v 26. 192-9, to re-noi’t on the problem? arising out of unemployment.

First Unemployment Board. The Act provided "or the setting tip of the first Unemployment Board,and the imposition of aii annual levy of £1 10s on all male persons required to reg ister under the Act .... The ,Unemployment Fund pt".ovicled for under the Act was designed to nice the requirements of an anticipated maximum of 15.000 unemployed men and it was considered that the fioard woild, with the resources at its disposal. he in a position to r.’’"enisn pro dilative work for the unemployed. Unfortunately, at the time the Ae< came into force, the Dominion wc‘ feeliuir the first effects o’’ the e''o!’oin’' depression, and the niimhe:- of unem ployed increased at a ram'd vnfe. T’ thest circumstances the position y;° beyond the capacity of tile reinedimeasures former 1 '- em pi over? cud t 1" heard found itself comnolWl to tnlureent action in the granting o” relief

Unemployment Amendment Act. The heavy drain on the Uneinplo' - ment Fund and the Consolidated Fun C | necessitated further financial provisio being made, and in 1.931' the Ummploy ment Amendment Act was passet This provided for the appointment <> a new hoard, the reduction of tl i amount of the annual levy‘to ’£l am tile imposition of a tax on wages salaries and other income of 3d in th £. women being included m the scop if the Act. As a result of. the tax 'fit 3d in the £ a much larger fund wriprovided, hut the relief payments con tinned to prove a heavy .drag on tin Consolidated Fund. Because of the serious state of tin national finances a further aniendm nl to the act was passed ill the roceia session, providing for an increase ir the amount of the wage tax to Is it the £.

The original Unemployment Board initiated five main schemes and sever'd subsidiary schemes for the provisioi of work. The best known of these 1 the No. 5 scheme, which, with certain modifications, is still in operation.

The No. 5 Scheme. When this scheme was inaugurate' it provided fo" two days' work enoli week for a single man, three davs’ work for a married man with a wife or ;• wile mifl one dependent, child, and lour I devs’ work for a married man with a i wily and two or more depend lit oliil- , droll. I Originally the rate nl nay was T ,<s j day, bill snhseorent ly il was brought ibiwn to Os for sinsrl' 1 neui and l°s I' l ' for nuiried men. If W's '.dsn l-en P I llilt till' funds :• 1 Ibe d'SDOsid of the In• i-.I wire iiisn fl'i-i<uit | ‘> orovide for overv registered unempl |, v"(l m n ' lo enndov inen under the sebenn. f<>“ 1 ino'-e than three weeks out o° lo’-i-. I fbe position until tl>e lmw . vule-.i s"f ••ndticed hv Mr ' Comf-eis : was l. «i 11 r| i f into ot'eraf i‘»ll a fo«- davs provides fur the abolition of the I land-down week, and the- payment o’

lower rates of wages for each day’s work. Many of the unemployed assert, however, that they will be no better off with the abolition of the stand-down week, because of the lower rates of pay ■md the discontinuance o: the issue of lations to relief workers by the Hospital Board.