WOMEN PROTEST

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1041, 4 August 1930, Page 16

WOMEN PROTEST

EXCLUDED FROM BILL FOR UNEMPLOYMENT GOVERNMENT CRITICISED That the exclusion of women from the provisions of the Unemployment Bill was unjust was the opinion expressed by the Mayoress. Mrs. A. D. Campbell, at a meeting of women held in the concert chamber of the Town Hall on Saturday - afternoon. About 60 persons attended. “The matter is of vital importance to women,” said the Mayoress. The provisions of the Bill were explained by Miss E. Melville, who said it was not clear whether it was intended that women should be excluded from the operations of the board in regard to such matters us the stimulation of employment. It was clearly stated that women, not being liable to the levy, were not eligible to participate in the sustenance allowance. “A great deal of the money to be used will come out of the Consolidated Fund,” said the speaker, “and every section of the community contributes to that.” A large number of women were wage-earners, and a great many of them were out of employment owing to the present industrial conditions. “I have convened this meeting in order that a protest against the defeats of the Bill might go forward from the women of this city,” said Miss A. Hasten, who said that the avenues of employment for women were being narrowed. Women Government servants were being denied superannuation privileges, because all who received positions now were being placed on the temporary list. BILL RESENTED Mrs. A. M. Cassie said she resented the introduction of a Bill excluding women, and Mrs. M. M. Dreaver said that the women of Auckland should vote out any man who voted for a Bill which excluded women. “The most unstatesmanlike piece of legislation that a most inept Government has yet brought forward.” and “the greatest insult that could be offered to the women of the country,” were the descriptions of the Bill applied by Mrs. M. 13. Soljak. She also criticised the uniform levy of 30s. At the conclusion of the addresses, the following resolution was carried: “That this meeting of women citizens protests against the exclusion of wageearning women from the benefits of the Unemployment Bill now before Par) ament, and suggests as an alternative that the scheme for an individual employment-tax, as recommended in the report of the Unemployment Committee, 1930, is preferable, as it includes women; and urges that all schemes dealing with unemployment conditions, to be effective, must extend to the consideration of women workers, many of whom are non-dependants of male workers.” A number of men were present, at the meeting, and when one rose to ask a question, it was pointed out that it was a women’s meeting. Reference to the notice convening the meeting, however. showed that its terms did not actually limit the right of attendance to women. Two men, who asked questions, were given a hearing, but when a third, who was not sympathetic toward the objects of the meeting, began to .make a 1 speech, the Mayoress declined to allow any but women to speak.