RELIEF PAY

Hokitika Guardian, 16 November 1933, Page 6

RELIEF PAY

PROTEST AT REDUCTION

DEPUTATION AT GISBORNE

(Per Press Association—Copyright)

GISBORNE, November 15. As a protest against the cut in the

relief pay allocation, a crowd of about three hundred, men, women and children assembled in the Cook Hospital grounds to-day while a deputation

went inside the building and interviewed a special committee of the Cook Hospital Board. The speakers stressed that hardship had resulted through the new scale, pointing out the impossibility of living on such rates. Under the new scale, a married man without children gets 17s 6d weekly; a man with one child gets 18s 9d weekly; a man with two children £1 a week; a man with three children 22s 6d a week; a man with four children 25s a week.; a man with five children gets 27s 6d, and a man with six children or more 30s.

The deputationists asked how was it possible to pay rent and buy food on these rates. The Board was asked to give sustenance to the families of the men stood dawn owing to their refusal to go into a camp; also to prevent the eviction of relief workers, and also for a general relief in necessitous cases.

The acting-chairman, Mr Howard Kenway, said that the, Board were sympathetic. They would render assistance as much as possible. The scope of the Board’s activities was limited by finance and by law. The Board invited the necessitous one to put in applications. Investigations would be made, and if the applications were found satisfactory, assistance vvould he given. Mr Kenway impressed it on the deputation that this was the last time that the Board could assist. The Board could do nothing with regard to evictions, though, perhaps, the Mortgagors’ Relief Act could he made applicable, but that was merely his own suggestion. The Board could no nothing in respect of the cases where men were being stood down for refusing work at a camp. Mrs Beer, a member of the Board, said that the Hospital Board recognised that, by its help, it was relieving the Unemployment Board of the responsibility, but, under the cirj cumstances, what else could the HosI pital Board do but render assistance. At the conclusion of the meeting, Mr Kenway sent the following telegram t.o the Minister of Employment : “The Hospital Board met a large deputation of unemployed this morning, stressing the very serious position i caused bv the recent reduction in the j allocation. The statements made to j us by the deputation are borne out by official figures,., and , cannot. Jbe re : ' futed, showing the deplorable conditions, of many families owing to. the recent cuts. The Board is awaiting a reasonable decision by yourself, which you cannot, ..refuse. The Board is granting relief in urgent cases, but on the clear .understanding that no further help .will be available from this ( Board’s funds in any, cases caused by unemployment. I can only re-affirm that the. responsibility , lies now only with your Department.” At a meeting ,of , the Chamber of Commerce, this afternoon, it was decided to support the protest made by the local bodies .and. others against,the cut in the relief work allocation.