RELIEF OF UNEMPLOYFj

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 960, 1 May 1930, Page 10

RELIEF OF UNEMPLOYFj

DUTIES ON TEA AND SUGAi SUGGESTED BANK DIRECTORS SCHEME Front. Our Resident Reporter | WELLINGTON, Tod*, 1 Remarking that he thought that no, ot the unemployment cures so o' - suggested came within the hound*" practical politics. Sir Harold Be*; champ, chairman of directors ofttHl Bank of -New Zealand, yesterday adv ‘ 2 csted the creation of a n unemplor, 1 fund financed by special I'ustoms wZjfl on sugar and tea "The scheme recommended by Unemployed Relief Commission for sijj creation ot a sustenance fund by ! It \ 3 in- • i poll-ta xonit 11 classes the con unity. workers an<J cmowCi ers alike, establishes the principle J j equality of sacrifice. which is mScommendable,” said Sir Harold. I am inclined to think it would be diff cult—almost impossible—to collect n tax. Jt would result in ceaseless ir/ tation on the part of workers, would have to submit to the deductijin J of this tax from their weekly wa*. v ! for one thing. •Moreover, having regard to tfcj: spirit of the age. I fancy it Wooi-lE end in an agitation on the part of tb * workers to obtain from employers advance in wages that would arrnj: cover the amount of the tax for they were responsible. Again, I imagine how keenly residents abroach called upon to pay taxe« for the relie of unemployment in their own tries—Great Britain, for examplewould resent the deduction of speda l -;, tax from dividends on shares held them in public companies operatiny - this Dominion. EQUALITY OF SACRIFICE “Still, one has to recognise that fell, this country, as well as others, therwill be at times a large number people out of work, and these and families must be temporarily provide for. That is of paramount importance. The two representatives j Labour on the Unemployed Relic® Commission to which I have referral | Messrs. Roberts and O'Brien, have aS-l ready admitted that there should I*H equality of sacrifice, that is in creatiniß a sustenance fund for the relief those unable to obtain work. A?«TjnjJffi ing that this principle is generally r.j.Ml mitted, it seems to me that in ordefl , .o attain that object it matters mm in what shape or form the fund created, provided, of course, it iH levied upon an equitable basis. Xow, instead of the poll-tax tug gested by the commission, I woukM advocate the levying of a < ustoms dutr-R of Td a lb on sugar, and od a lb 0;®! tea. On the quantities of both ar-H tides imported for the 12 months endet®! February ”8, 193 u. these would yidfl| no less than «£801«.627. These dutia® should be specifically ear-marked anfl| 1 set aside for the sole purpose of re-J litving unemployment, i ‘The duties as collected could fej pr.id over to. say. the Public Trusted who would be called upon to pay terest thereon at. say, 4 per cent. fS annum, varying according to circumstances on daily balances. As required. municipalities and count; councils or other properly constitute! authorities, dealing with unemployed would, by requisition, obtain grants '.n aid from the Public Trustee, sud grants, of course, being based on tte > numbers of men unemployed in eac

NO PAY FOR NON-WORKERS p In order not to compete with thosJi ilready engaged, wages for those ur- .£ | employed should be fixed at not tagfif : than 20 per cent, below the i j rates for unskilled labour. Kxcefajß : in cases of illness or physical infina-w i ity. no payment whatever should made to any person who is not prHs| ' pared to work to the satisfaction i:® those by whom he is engaged in prt»S } perous times. “There should be at the end of eacfcjl ; year a very substantial addition to tl*fc fund administered by the Pubixflg ! Trustee, and this in course of t»B| : would assume such proportions would enable all cases of unemploy-Hj i ment to be relieved without « allngH j upon the Government or public tor assistance, as at present. “Some people may criticise nr Bp scheme on the ground that I am prc-H | posing to interfere with the ‘free breai-BS ; fast table’ by taxing such universe fif commodities as tea and sugar. I-fjL f there or was there ever a free breai-Ejl | fast table? No, it is. in effect, mererßi' a political phrase. But if the poirp 1 would be that the duties I proper would in all probability br* less that the poll-tax recommended by the coemission. “In the case of a family of five. ' estimate the duty on sugar wou* amount to not more than t>d a week a mere bagatelle compared with wittsucli a family would pay for amusements. Further, the cost of cohering duties on tea and sugar would fl cost the country anything worth min tioning. while everyone would thtf | contribute his quota."