BRITISH POLITICS.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 390, 17 March 1908, Page 3

BRITISH POLITICS.

England’s Unemployed.

..... London, March 14. In the House of Commons Mr Philip Snowden Wilson moved the second reading of the Unemployed Workmen’s Bill. Much public interest was displayed. Mr Wilson, explaining the rooc principle of the Bill, said the problem of the unemployed must be regarded as a national matter. Mr Ramsay Macdonald seconded, claiming that the measure was only an extension of the legislation of 1905, which gave the unemployed the hope of State employment. It was a mistake for liberals to fancy that they heard the rumble of the tumbril of Socialism. No fateful results would follow from this Labour demand, and the cost would not exceed that of one Dreadnought annually. Mr F. Maddison moved an amendment, affirming that the Bill would throw out of work more than it would assist, and would also destroy the power of organised labour. He censured the Socialists for telling people there was a way by which everybody could get vVork, by advocating ruinous and disastrous land schemes. State control of lives must follow recognition of the fight, to have work, which was an interference no fredom-loving people would tolerate. In the debate on the Unemployed Bill, Mr Grayson said that if the Government were unable to solve the problem of unemployment, it ought to resign. The money needed could be 9b' tained by bursting the bags ot the wealthy, which were filled with unearned increment.

Mr John Burns, in a vigorous, argumentative speech, repudiated the charge that nothing had been done for the poor. The cry was everywhere raised , that the Government was threading the monopolies of the rich, and exalting the fustian and corduroy at the expense of the tall hat and frock coat. There was no other country in the world that spent so much in the relief of the poor, or where the people interested themselves so whole-heartedly in efforts to assist the indigent. Referring to the future of farm colonies, he stated that Wollesley Bay involved a loss of ,£22,000 a year, gave striking illustrations of the unsatisfactory results of such methods of assisting the unemployed.- Few local authorities desired the powers the Bill conferred, and he was confident such legislation would prove a delusion and a snare.

Mr Asquith declared that the acceptance of the main principles of the Bill would be more prejudical to the workers than to any other class. It would vastly aggravate the unemployed problem, and ultimately necessiate complete State control of the whole machinery of production. The Bill was rejected by 265 to 116, and the amendment carried by 41 to 95. There was much cross voting. The majority against the Bill composed 195 Ministeralists, and 70 Unionists. The minority included 41 labourites, 20 Nationalists, 2 Unionists, acid a ntrmber of Radicals.

The South Australian Premier attended the debate.