THE UNEMPLOYMENT PROBLEM

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 877, 22 January 1930, Page 8

THE UNEMPLOYMENT PROBLEM

Sir. — Summarising- a lengthy analysis in your issue of the 20th inst., your contributor “Peter Simple” states* in

effect, that unemployment is a matter for which the Government is in no way responsible, that the unemployed themselves are mainly to blame for their present predicament, that they have no right to demand assistance from the Government and should tighten their belts and be content to work anywhere for any wage that they can get!

While admitting that there has been a great deal of thriftlessness and extravagance among all classes, and that excessive gambling, intemperate living and laziness are contributory factors to unemployment, I wrould not absolve the Government from all liability even on these grounds, and one cannot get away from the fact that there are a great many thrifty, industrious, decent living men unemployed through no fault of their own and that there are many ways in which the Government is responsible for this state of affairs. Consider, for example, our efforts to establish secondary industries in New Zealand. How often are they thwarted by the dumping of cheap foreign-made goods produced under sweating conditions which defy competition? Take, as an example, the recently established iron industry at Onakaka. Not long ago we were paying about £2O a ton for raw pig iron landed in New Zealand. The Onakaka works showed that a better quality iron could be produced in New Zealand for £6 a ton or less. Immediately this was discovered, pig iron produced in India by coolies working for lOd a day of 14 hours was dumped here at £5 a ton! Other local industries are kept in subjection in a similar manner. The president of the New Zealand Dairy Association (Mr. Morton) has drawn attention to the efforts made by powerful interests to crush our rennet industry, prior to the establishment of which as much as £35 a keg was charged for rennet required by the eheesemaking industry. When the New Zealand rennet appeared on the market the British firm reduced its price to £3 13s a keg. notwithstanding that its price on the London market was £5 13s a keg. Of course, when local industries arc

successfully strangled in this manner, back goes the price to its old standard, and so the people are fleeced by huge combines exploiting cheap labour .and our own people are deprived ol employment. I would like ‘Peter Simple to answer these questions: Has not tne Government of this country a definite obligation to take whatever steps are necessary to protect our local industries from such unfair competition ana to maintain a decent standard of hy 1 ?® for its own people? And if it tan to keep the products of sweated lapou out of this country, is it not, in measure, responsible for unemployment? _ _ .RICHD. SIMMON S.