UNEMPLOYMENT FIGURES.

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 1, Issue 79, 24 November 1931, Page 2

UNEMPLOYMENT FIGURES.

A. G.

COTTRELL.

A

THOMPSON, ,

To the Editor, ; Sir,-r-I would like to bring under your riotice some int'eresting figures fegarding unemployihent faxation. UherhplQyrnent levy to, March 31. 1931, was £312,196; Government subsidy, £213,930; sundj'y revenue, £951. The total received by th^ Unemployment Board was £527,077, the total expenditure b.eihg £428,500. During |;his period 20,000 were registered as unemployed and were engaged on full jtime at 9s per day for single men and 12s. for married mpn. . The anficipated revenue for the year ending.. March '.31,, 1932, including emer-

gency wages tax is ii,2:uu,uuu, pius Government sub'sidy £1,200,000, making a total of £2,400,000. , . For the period to" date there h'as been an average of approximately 50,000 unemployed registered. We therefore have the position that the numbef unemployed is 2h times greater than during 1930-31, and the revenue in 1931-32 five times greater than in 1930-31. •Yet our unemployed married and single men are only avefaging two days weekly at the same rates of wages as last year. There seems to be a remarkahle discrepancy in these figures, " arid" it ,ls apparent that although a larger amount is being spent on unemployment than in previpus years, the wage-earners are not gettihg the, benefit. Tliere must undoubtedly be some serious leakage in this fund or else the people are be.'ng taxed in excess of the requirements of the Unemployment Board. . In siny case the figures are so divergent that the people should give the administration of this fund very earnest consideration. — I am, etfc.,

Rotorua, Nov. 21, 1931. To the Edtior. Sir,— -Apropos the interjections at the Hon. E. ,A. Ransom's meeting on Saturday last, we would like to dcclare definitely that the interpections did not emanate solely from members of the , Labour " Party. In fact,. the most persistent critic made himself a still greater nuisance at one of Mr.. Moncur's meetings. We protest against the chairman's suggestion that our party members were entirely to blame and can assure you that they were no more responsible for the running comments than they were for the adverse resolution proposed. We would also like to point out that Mr. Ransom came to Rotorua in . the interests of Mr. Clinkard's candidature and therefore the interjections and adverse comment had to be expected. — I am, etc.,

Sec. Rotorua Branch, Labour Party.