Citizens Say

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 298, 8 March 1928, Page 10

Citizens Say

(To the Editor.)

PARTY POLITICS Sir, —. All Irish historians lament the great harm which factionism has done to Ireland, and it is pleasing to note that a determined attempt is now being made to stamp out party feelings among all the local bodies. The Irish poet gives expression to the sentiment now prevailing: Am 1 mad that I should cherish That which leaves hut hitter fruitt Let me -pluck it ere 1 perish Though my heart he at the root. At a meeting composed of delegates from all Ireland and presided over by Mr. Blythe, Minister of Justice, the following resolution was adopted: “That this society of the Ard Comhaishe give its whole strength in support of suitable persons pledged to work for efficient, progressive and economical local administration and the total exclusion therefrom of party politics. CLAN-CONAL. CRIMINAL FOOLISHNESS Sir, Time and time again attention has been drawn to the colour of the tramway poles that infest the city streets, and the fact that on wet nights they are practically invisible in the strongest lights. In recent weeks I have seen two cars wrecked on these posts, the second occasion being last evening, when a brand-new car was damaged to the extent of at least £SO on the post in the centre of the road at the Junction of Queen and Victoria Streets, and a passenger was badly cut with glass. The city will this year collect some £4,500 from drivers* licences, and it is a crying shame—more, it is criminal foolishness—that the City Council does not either remove the posts or spend some money painting them white or a bright yellow. Now that wet weather is approaching is the time for action. The City Council cannot be held entirely blameless if deaths are caused by these posts. MOTOR. THE C.N.R. Sir,— I observe in your issue ofl yesterday you depict a scene of Canadian farmers on a marketing tour of the United Kingdom, visiting the Royal farms at Windsor. I would point out that this marketing tour has been organised by the Canadian National Railways and not by the C.P.R. as stated. This is an event upon which the Canadian National Railways should be congratulated. Canada is a great producer of surpluses and Great Britain is a great absorber of them and it is always desirable that producers and consumers should be brought together: besides the progress of the farmers in future promises to be more than ever dependent upon an increased knowledge of world economic movements, and the wider the view the farmers get of marketing and economic conditions the better for them. The visit will be the means of creating an interest In the movements to develop markets within the Empire and to help trade between Canada and the Mother Country. These farmers w iH also visit Denmark and on their return to England will be honoured by being received by his Majesty the King, also by his Royal Highness the Prince of T\ ales. The Prince of Wales,

with his love for Canada, and as the owner of a Canadian ranch, has personal as well as public grounds for his interest in this visit of Canadian CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS (J. Foley.) PARKING IN ALBERT STREET Sir, — I follow your correspondent, "Why Die Young?” in condemning the parking of cars in the centre of the roadway in Albert Street. It is undoubtedly a great danger, and one that the traffic authorities, if they had a proper regard for the public safety, would not allow. Like your correspondent, I, too, have frequent occasion to cross Albert Street at its intersection with Wyndham Street, and I, too, have had to "jump for my life.” The first rule of safety is (or ought to be) that the pedestrian should have a clear view of approaching wheeled traffic. You cannot get it in Albert Street, between Victoria Street and Customs Street West. .It is all very well to provide this cheap parking for motor-cars, but not at the risk of public safety. Let the authorities erect proper accommodation —and charge for it. I maintain that the all-day parking of motor-cars in Albert Street is a menace to safety, and it ought not to be tolerated. SAFETY FIRST. UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE Sir. — I have read with much interest the letter over the signature of “Bill Heather,” in The Sun, though I disagree with a considerable part of what he says. To one who knows anything about the unemployment insurance scheme in the Old Country, it would seem that, having a prejudice against the same for some reason, “Bill Heather” has been influenced thereby and has not sta/ted his case according to facts —facts, with which, as chairman of a court of referees, surely he should have been acquainted. His opening paragraph surely is a misstatement: “Unemployment insurance has been suggested as a means to ward the amelioration or alleviation of the distress so often caused by unemployment, not as a solution of the unemployment problem.” He states his case on the assumption that a New Zealand scheme would be on the same lines as obtain in Great Britain. That being so, he must be aware that administration expenses would be paid jointly by employers, workers and the State, the total being a small percentage on the total contributions, and consequently would not add so much to the Civil Service expenses as he would lead his readers to believe, even though a new department would be required to deal with the unemployment insurance scheme. The concluding sentence of his second paragraph, “Costs,” he must know to be a “red herring.” While a few employers, no doubt, pay the workers’ share of the contribution, they form a very small minority, and the worker is aware that deduction from his wages for his contribution is a legal deduction, and he would spend a very great deal of time, in the ordinary case, trying to find an employer who would pay his contributions for him. The note under “Increase of costs” requires amplification. The cost, no doubt, is passed on by the employer, but with a large staff it is only proportionate to the costs with a small staff,

so that the increase in production co is only a small thing, after all. Aga • the award system of wages ana effect have nothing to do with un ployment insurance. Certainly nun* nature is human nature, but it does .° : make the average worker such a 1 J that he will draw unemployment insurance benefit when he can work, nor, as “Bill Heather” must know when he can get a refund after havi paid so many contributions a reached a certain age. v Thousands obtain refunds an< * thousands more never come on ben though their contributions wouid en * them to do so were they unempio,y Does “Bill Heather” mean that Courts of Referees are as an army officials? Surely this is straining point, and, in any case, local advi • committees deal with most of th e ”, y he mentions, the courts dealing with cases specially referred ther these being an exceedingly small J tion of the cases put through by committees. . . Unemployment insurance is in ance, not charity. Premiums are p and the worker is entitled to b® according to his premiums (contr _ tions) when he complies with the ditions. No insurance is paid D * any premium paid. Unemploymen surance would follow the natural co As said before, it is not a solution o unemployment problem, nor it ia tended to benefit present unemp ment, but it is a provision f° r future. lap( | With the writer’s suggestion _ .K ie rt development I say nothing, my being only to controvert some statements made on unemploy® e surance. j q, i