WRONG POLICY

Hokitika Guardian, 13 June 1932, Page 5

WRONG POLICY

i» 4b.. I Si.l . ADOPTED BY GOVERNMENT. RATIONS AND RELIEF WORKERS. (By Telegraph—Per Press Association.) ; CHRISTCHURCH, June 11. “It looks to me as if the' Government ,is _determined upon a policy' of giving rations under its scheme only in those cases; where ': J.he' /appijccwjit is not getting relief work. It seems to m e that if there are two ways of doing a thing—a wrong way and a right way -•-the Government can be trusted to find the wrong way,.’’....,. . in tnese "era’s tne Mayor (Mr D. G. (Sullivan, M.l‘7), commented upon a telegram which he received this afternoon from the Minister of .Employment (the Right Hon. J. G. Coates) in reply to the Mayor's protest against the manner in jvhieh the Government’s scheme for rations was being operated. Mr Sullivan, in a teiegram sent to the Minister "this morning, protested against the rejection of so many app.ic-ant-s for relief, despite the fact tlaat many of "the applicants had previously been receiving help from the North Canterbury Hospital Board. / The following reply from Mr Coates was received by, Mr 'Sullivan this afternoon : —“Replying to your telegram our instructions are that applications for rations to supplement the ordinary iscule. of relief are to be considered in the: light of circumstances in individual casps, and, where necessity is shown, additional provision is to be made. The fact that assistance has hitherto been granted or refused by the Hospital Board is not, of course, conclusive in indicating what is to be contained .but each case mint be assured that, as far as available funds permit, officers in charge will assist in order of urgency on necessity being shown. Commenting on the reply, Mr Sulk - van said that the telegram meant (1) that the Hospital Board's opinion in regard to the question of necessity or otherwise was being discarded and not taken as a guide by/ the Minister or the Labour 3 Department, and (2) that apparently the Officer-in-charge of the Labour Department was the judge of ’necessity.

‘‘Before we can folly judge the position,” said Mr Sullivan, “it will .be necessary to know what are tihe instructions in detail that have been issued to the otHcer-in-eharge. ,It looks to me as if, the Government .is determined on a policy of giving rations under its -scheme, only in those ea-ses where the applicant is not getting relief work, and refusing it to those who are getting relief work. .If that is the. case, a serious position and new sources of discontent are being created, and an impossifc’e faslt is ffiing to be thrown upon the backs of the voluntary organisations. It seems to me that if there are two ways of doing a thing

—a wrong way and a. right way—the Government can bo trusted to find the wrong way.