THE BRITISH UNEMPLOYED

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2334, 28 October 1908, Page 4

THE BRITISH UNEMPLOYED

GABLE NEWS

KEIR HARDIE’S AMENDMENT

REJECTED.

A VIGOROUS DEBATE

United Press Association. Copyright (Received October 27, 11.10 p.m.)

LONDON, Oct. 27.

Mr. Keir Hardie’s amendment was rejected by 246 to 68. Mr. Alden’s Ministerialist motion was carried by 196 to 35.

The Speaker’s rejecting Mr. Goulding’s fiscal amendment on the ground that it was outside the scope of the Government proposals dealing with the, pyesent emergency, narrowed the debate to the adequacy or inadequacy of the proposals. ' Mr: Alden hoped that the palliatives were intended to precede real effective blows at the causes of unemployment. Mr. Keir Hardic endeavored to belittle the proposals, and raised Liberal protests by remarking that everybody but Mr, John Burns, who was an old man of the sea^ round the neck of the Government, knew that the present crisis was coining. He contended that emigration was no longer available, and emphasised the ■number of unemployed in Canada and elsewhere. The policy of dumping our unemployed oil the colonies was straining the loyalty of many workers there. He appealed to the Government not to leave the distribution of the grant to the Local Government Board, but to -appoint a special committee of the Cabinet to supervise it, and threatened, if the worst came to the worst, to go out among his own people and take the responsibility of the advice he gave them. The right to live meant the right to work, and if the unemployed were unprovided for under the law they could not be asked to obey the law. Mr. Iveir Hardie said that the country must be shocked out of inaction.

Messrs Crooks and Ramsay McDonald attacked the Government.

Mr. John Burns Vigorously defended the Government. He did not wish the Distress Committee to be able to complain that the money demanded for relief work was withheld. The crisis was not as had aswhen the Employment- Act was passed. Accelerating work meant five millions spent before March next. The best agencies for work were also better acquainted with- deseawing cases than a central body could be. Mr. Burns was surprised at the Opposition mentioning that the system introduced in 1806 allowed a maximum of 10,000 reservists to go to the colonies without forfeiting their pensions, addiaag that 6300 were now in the colonies. Mr. Balfour strongly complained of the refusal of a. two day's debate. Referring to unfit labor employed on special relief work, he described it as contrary to freeirade principles inasm ueh as it- avis buying the worst goods in the dearest market.

Mr. Asquith defended the proposals, as giving within immediate resources the widest effective relief with a minimum risk of demoralisation and- humiliation.

[Mr. Keir Hardie’s amendment, moved on behalf of the Independent Labor party, -was to the effect- thatwhile recognising the importance of Mr. Asquith’s promise to introduce legislation dealing with unemploy'mept on a permanent basis, and welcqming the promise to administer with more elasticity the existing Actand tq provide more money, the House Was of opinion that the proposal' was quite inadequate to meet the pressing needs of the winter, and the responsibility for the absence of proper machinery for carrying outthe existing powers and the general unpreparedness of the country to meet the unemployed crisis was* due to t-lie neglect of the Government to make provision for a state of -affairs clearly foreseen. The Ministerialist motion welcomed Mr. Asquith's statement, and approved of the steps proposed to be taken.]