BRITISH POLITICS.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIII, Issue 9096, 16 March 1908, Page 5

BRITISH POLITICS.

the UNEMPLOYED WORKERS’ BILL. an interesting discussion. Press Association.—Copyright. r London, March 14. In the House of Commons, Mr Phillip Snowden moved the second reading of Mr Wilson’s Unemployed Workmen’s Bill. Much public interest is displayed in the Bill. Mr Snowden explained the root principle of the Bill, and said the problem of the unemployed must be regarded as a national matter. Mr Ramsay McDonald seconded the motion, claiming that the measure was only an extension of the legislation of 1905. which gave the unemployed hope of State employment. It was a mistake for the Liberalsjfto fancy they heard the rumble of the tumbril of 'Socialism, but no fateful results would follow this labour demand, and the cost would not exceed that of one Dreadnought annually. Mr P. Maddison moved an amendment affirming that the Bill would throw out of work more than it would assist, and also destroy the power of organised labour. He censured the Socialists for telling the people there was a way by which everybody would get work and advocating ruinous and disastrous land schemes. The State control of lives must follow the recognition of the right to have work, which was an interference no ireedom-ffiyMig people would tolerate. Mr Grayson said that if the Government were unable to solve the problem of unemployment they ought to resign. The money needed could he obtained by bursting the bags of the wealthy,- which were filled by unearned increment.

Mr Bums, in a vigorous and argumentative speed), repudiated the charge that nothing had been done for the ‘poor. The cry was everywhere raised that the Government w’ere threatening the monopolies of the rich and exalting fustian and corduroy at the expense of the tali hat and frock coat. Ho other country would spend so much on the relief of the poor, or its people interest themselves so whole-hearted to assist the indigent. Referring to the failure of farm colonies, he stated that Hollesley Bay involved a loss of ever £33,000 a year. He gave striking illustrations of the unsatisfactory results of such methods of assisting the unemployed. Few local authorities desired the powers that the Bill conferred. He was confident such legislation was 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, vastly aggravate unemployment, and ultimately necessitate complete State control of the whole machinery of production. The Bill was rejected by 265 to 116, and the amendment carried by 241 to 95. There was much cross-voting. The majority against the Bill composed 195 Minsterialists and 70 Unionists. The minority included 41 Labourites, 20 Nationalists, 3 Unionists, and a number of Radicals.

The South Australian Premier attended the debate.

THE PATENTS ACT,

Received March 16, 8.54 a.m. London, March 15

Mr Lloyd George, speaking at Carnarvon, said that the Patents Bill which provides that patients protected in Britain must be manufactured there was already bringing into the country many foreign industries and he anticipated that they would soon provide employment for tens of thousands of British workmen.