"NO FUNDS"

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 254, 18 June 1932, Page 4

"NO FUNDS"

The refusal of the Unemployment Board to assist single forestry workers in the Rotorua district by the provision of the necessary working clothing in which to face winter conditions in the forestry plantations, although not unexpected, is indefensible. The matter is one of relatively very minor importance, but with every appreciation of the problems with v^hich the board is faced, it serves as an illuminating commentary upon the olficial attitude in these matters. For some time past the Unemployment Board has met requests for assistance with the parrot cry of "no funds," until the phrase has become practically a sine qua non in all official communications. Machinery was erected for outdoor rations relief during the winter months, but with half of the winter almost passed, only a proportion of the unemployed in the country are receiving any relief by these channels. The board has no funcfe. Requests have been made, backed by practical data, that the board should assist land settlement to absorb unemployed, but again the board has no funds. Admittedly the calls upon its

resources have been extremely heavy, but when the wages tax was increased and other unemployment taxation imposed, the Government had the facts hefore it, and carried out legislation of its own drafting without modification. But even admitting that the Unemployment Board is daily sinking deeper into the Slough of Despond, it cannot reasonably be argued that it is unable to find a few pounds to assist in providing 130 men with absolute necessities. By its refusal to assist, it has simply placed a number of the men in the position where they will be unable to accept the work, and as a result will continue a charge upon the funds in less productive employment. It is this sort of policy, operating in manifold channels, that is nullifying the work of the board and arousing an antagonistic spirit in the country. But the board, through Mr. Coates, did not only refuse assistance; it suggested that the local eommittee, already overburdened in these matters, should shoulder the responsibility and arrive at some arrangement which would enable the men to be supplied by local retailers. This was a matter which could quite as easily have been arranged by the board as by the committee, and with more expedition. On 10/- per week pocket money the men would barely be able to fit themselves out before the end of the planting when they would prohably he rewarded with a used outfit and the consciousness of labour as a reward for their endeavours. The function of the Unemployment Board is to re~ lieve unemployment, but in this particular instance it appears merely to have sheltered behind its catch-cry to evade its responsibilities.