UNEMPLOYED AND THE LAND

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 245, 7 June 1932, Page 7

UNEMPLOYED AND THE LAND

E. EARLE

VAILE.

HUGH

RUSSELL.

(To the Editor) Sir, — All discussion is useful, but derision gets us nowhere, Mr. J, E. Martin's attempted sarcasms at the ex~ pense of those who, in common with himself, are working toward a solution of the unemployment problem are not, to say the least, helpful. He exclaims, "Five acres and a cow. God help the cow!" Now friend Martin may be sup* posed to know his own disfrict, but this reflection is certainly npt true of many other districts. For e^am, ple, the dairy farm on "Broadlands" is carryinng a cow to two acres, and is doiqg them well. And I venture to say that vast areas in the Waikato Valley from the sea coast to Lake Taupo will, when improved, easily support a cow to three acres, With the cow can be run two or three iambs which may be bought for a few shillings and will grow into good mutton. On the remaining two acres a man can, if he will, grow nearly all I the food necessary for himself and ! his family, and a small crop of onions, earrots, parsnips, etc., etc., for sale. He can also keep poultry with great advantage. These resources, which the settler will hold independently of any employer, together? with such casual wages as may be available, should enable him to live quite comfortaly. Maori friends have told me that if if they could get one acre they would be set up. In Greece, one and threequarter acres per person has sufficed. Are we in New Zealand such dolts that we cannot succeed with five acres of superior land, superior stock and infinitely superior climate? Anyhow, as I have pointed out elsewhere, any scheme to meet the situation must be within the financial capacity of the country and within the physical and mental capacity of the unemployed. Any plan presupposing the expenditure of £1,000 — or even £500 — per settler is impossible of accomplishment, and it is wrong to delude the unemployed by suggesting such. The number of unemployed men is about 60,000. If we are to settle only half of these at only £500 each, it means the raising of £15,000,000 — an absolutely impossible proposition. Again, the successful conduct of a dairy farm is not within the capacity of more than 5 per cent. of the unemployed, leaving 95 per cent. unprovided for. v Anyhow, what do the unemployed themselves want? What will they undertake? Nothing is more certain than that the present situation cannot continue — vast waste of human labour and vast waste of public funds. The sources of revenue froip taxation are being dried up. Already it is estimated that the actual yield of the 11wages tax will 'yield no more per head of unemployed than dicf the former 3 d tax, plus subsidy. Ere long the number of citizens providing public revenues will be quite unable fcn support the host of citizens dependent in various ways on those revenues — unemployed, civil servants, Government contractors, pensioners of every sort, kind, and description, those mentally, morally and physically sick, etc., etc., etc. And nothing is being done to meet the situation. The people and Government of New Zealand behave as if stunned. Well knowing that a dreadful disaster will shortly strike them they have neither courage, brains, nor energy to rise up and avert' it. — I am. etc.

(To the Editor) Sir, — I quite agree with a number of practical farmers whose articles on land settlement have appeared on various occasions in your paper recently. I heartily endorse Mr, Vaile's suggestion, and will further suggest that those most ably and best fitted gather round a table and carefully investigate the various schemes brought forward, endeavouring to formulate one that will stand up against the severest criticism. Land settlement to-day is fraught with many dangers; settlers throughout the country are in a very critical position, and unless the principal mortgagee is prepared to alleviate their position by bringing about some far-reaching measures of relief, the ultimate loss to the country of many good farmers is inevitable. There is nothing more iniquitous than this system of postponing a capital charge from one year to the next; it is utterly impossible for a Favmer to meet both curent and & postponed charge in the one year. In these times of low prices it simply cannot be done. I will strenuously oppose any scheme brought forward and to be operated at Galatea, Ngalcura, or elsewhere, unless the settler has a reasonably fair chance of making good, gaining his independency, or at least being able to look forward to old age, and the end of days of struggling in the bonds of slavery, with some satisf action. Mr. Ford's scheme, with an estimated cost of £700, together with the added remuneration for three years brings the total cost in the vicinity of £1,200, and I will maintain that you cannot place a settler in a position to enable him to obtain a livelihood for himself and family for ' a lesser amount than £1,200 to £1,600, according to the nature of fche soil and the climate. Even then, you will be faced with capital charges, and in all probability you will have to come to the ultimate conclusion that the settler cannot meet them, especially so long as existing conditions remain. There is more in Mr. J. E. Martin's sfatement, which appeared in your issue of June 3, than the average . citizen realises. — 1 am, etc.