H.—35.

Briefly, the sclieme provided for free labour on a rationed basis, the cost of materials, supervision, tools, transport, &c, to be provided by local bodies, and the Unemployment Board to be responsible for the wages of the men employed. Workers who had been resident in New Zealand for at least six months and who had been unemployed and registered as such at a bureau of the Labour Department or post-office for not less than fourteen days were eligible for work under the scheme, the work to be rationed as follows :— (a) Two days' work each week for a single man : (b) Three days' work each week, for a married man able to show that he was maintaining in New Zealand a wife or a wife and one dependent child under sixteen years of age : (c) Four days' work each week for a married man able to show that he was maintaining in New Zealand a wife and two or more dependent children under sixteen years of age : It was arranged that a widower with, one or more dependent children under sixteen years of age should be treated on the same basis as a married man. Important provisos incorporated in the rules intimated that work approved for the scheme must be exclusive of that already provided for on the current year's estimates or scheduled for the following vear's estimates, or work which had merely been left off the estimates in anticipation of an unemployment subsidy. Ordinary employees were not to be discharged so that advantage might be taken of the offer made under the scheme. This last proviso was made to ensure that ordinary employees of the local bodies would be retained on the usual work which would be done in any case. If no such restriction had been imposed by the Board, it is obvious that numbers of these employees would have been discharged and re-employed under the scheme. Local Unemployment Committees played an important part in the operation of Scheme No. 5, being requested to advise the Unemployment Commissioner periodically of the number of men employed, the estimated weekly wages to be paid, the number of men for whom employment could not be found, and also if the work offering was more than sufficient to accommodate the registered unemployed in their districts. In any places where no committees existed, the local body's Engineer or other officer was directed to engage the men from the nearest bureau and to furnish the necessary returns. The Board left the fixing of wage-rates entirely to the local bodies concerned, but suggested that men should continue to be employed under Scheme No. 5 at the rates previously ruling for the particular class of relief work in their districts, providing, however, that where any work carried out would in ordinary circumstances require to be done by skilled labour under award rates, then the Arbitration Court award rates for that class of work must be paid. Each local body paid the wages to the men and then claimed refund of wages weekly from the Unemployment Board, but such refund, was in no circumstances to exceed the rate current on Government relief works, which at that time was 14s. a day. In cases where the wages paid were in excess of this amount, such excess had to be borne by the local body. In claiming a refund of wages each local body prepared a voucher for the total weekly amount, and attached the wages-sheet showing the men's names and coupon-book numbers, with their receipts for wages paid. These documents were submitted to the Government Certifying Officer, who had to be satisfied that the men concerned were those authorized by him to obtain employment under the scheme and that all conditions of .the scheme had been complied with. If in order, the voucher could then be cashed at any money-order office. The initial amount allocated under this scheme was £150,000, and the scheme was to operate until the end of March. The response from local bodies was immediate, and by the end of February the great majority of the unemployed men were working two, three, or four days per week, according to their status. A further allocation of funds was necessitated, and the estimated total expenditure on wages to the 31st March, 1931, was £331,560. Such an excessive expenditure on a scheme which from the first was intended only as a palliative was occasioned by the continued increase in the numbers of registered unemployed. The rapidity with which the depression spread over the Dominion accentuated the unemployment problem to an amazing degree, while the introduction of Scheme No. 5 was itself an incentive to register. Too much emphasis cannot be laid on the fact that the introduction of this scheme was the first occasion in the history of New Zealand when an effort was made to provide some work for practically all genuinely unemployed male wage-earners. It must be recognized also that the provision of some measure of relief work on a large scale thus afforded an opportunity for employers to dispense with the services of employees whom they had previously retained in spite of the depression. It was inevitable that large numbers of men who had not previously worked for .wages, but who were now suffering from decreased returns from their farm, business, or profession, would register in an endeavour to take advantage of the scheme. Much extra work has been imposed on the Unemployment Board and Local Unemployment Committees in an endeavour to eliminate from the benefits of the scheme those persons who are not strictly unemployed wage-earners and therefore ineligible to register as unemployed. The tremendous drain on the Board's resources will be realized when it is stated that there were 17,000 registered unemployed at the date of commencement of Scheme No. 5, and that this number had risen to over 38,000 by the end of March —an increase of more than 100 per cent. The receipts from the levy, if distributed over twelve months, represent a weekly income of approximately £12,000, and this, if wholly expended, is subsidized by a like amount from the Consolidated Fund. There were approximately 25,000 men working under Scheme No. 5 during the last week of March, and the Board's weekly commitments under this scheme were then almost double its maximum income.

10