UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIX, Issue 255, 26 September 1929, Page 2

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE.

IS IT A REMEDY? (Contributed by N.Z. "Welfare League.) .For some years past the socialist Labour Tarty has beeu advocating unemployment insurance somewhat on the imes adopted in Britain. Recently the Minister of Justice, Mr Wiiiord, stated in tho House that it is the intention of the Government next session to introduce an unemployment Insurance Bill. The questions which arise from this pronouncement, and which should have the most serious thought-of all is whether such policy is desirable or likely to prove ultimately beneficial to the country. The Minister is taking a right course in instituting examination into the statistical basis of such schemes. More than that requires to be taken in the inquiries as principles which are very important are involved in this State venture. The general talk of “dole" versus “insurance” does not help in enlightening the public on the subject of tfio British scheme, as it must be apparent to anyone who has looked at the matter that the system i 6 one of general insurance subsidised by State grants. It is not general insurance alone, nor State relief alone, but both in one.

How it affects the State, the industries and the workers are all big issues and therefore the whole matter of adopting such plan in a young country such as this should be approached with the utmost caution. It has many angles and should be looked at front each and everyone of these. The Socialist labourites regard it from the point of sentiment. Their general political economics are bound up with the word “give.” It is one of their ideals. In this connection the following statement of the Biitish Lord Privy Seal, Mr Thomas, might be considered:—“When you advocate ideals, do not be blind to the fact that thev have to be paid for.” In regard to the paying there is a strong tendency to think ouly of what the Treasury can stand. On this Mr Thomas said: “When we talk of the Unemployment Insurance Act it is too often forgotten that the finances of it and the’payment of the benefits in the main do not come from the Exchequer but from industry itself—employers and work people.” He might have added that what comes from the Exchequer is drawn from the industries. THE BRITISH SCHEME.

Under tho scheme at Home the contributions are : —Men (over 18 years of age) 8d a week from employer, 7d from employee; women (over 18) 7d from employer, fid from employee; boys (16 to 18) 4d from empioyer, 3Jd from employee; girls 3}d from employer, 3d from employee. The State contributed amounts ranging from 4£d to 8d per person. The weekly rates of benefit range from 17s for men to os for young girls. Here are some of tne financial results: —In 1927 the total receipts, including the State’s contributions, had reached £278,560,705. The payments were £325,871,529, leaving a debit balance of £25,050,167 apart from an amount of £24,710,000 in outstanding Treasury advances. There have been special advances from the Treasury all the time. Recently the new GovT ernment had to get a resolution through the House to meet outstanding liabilities. There was an outcry from the backbenchers that the party was not honouring its promise to increase the benefits. That is one phase to bo considered. No matter on what actuarial calculations the scheme is based, once it is adopted it becomes a political matter and the calls are for ever larger grants and increased benefits. This year the Fund at Home is stated to owe the Treasury £36,500,000. Within the last two months the Minister of Labour, Miss M. Bondfield, described it as being ‘in a state of bankruptcy.” WHERE ARE WE GOING? . An English poet has written “evil is wrought for want of thought as well as for want of heart.” This we are apt to forget in a time when we are governed to some extent in thought by slogans and shibboleths. “Work or Maintenance,” “The State’s duty to provide” and other slogans of a similar character have their influence on the public mind. The schemes of social insurance in the forms of superannuation, pensions, compensation, family allowance, full wages on relief works are in the ultimate fresh burdens upon industry. Unemployment insurance is but another of the same class. It is by no means a cure for unemployment. At the best it is but a means of spreading the effects of unemployment over the community instead of leaving same to be borne only by those immediately affected.

If things would only “stay put,” but unfortunately there are laws of reaction more powerful at times than Acts of Parliament. Can we go on burdening industry and look to it to produce the goods is the most vital issue we have to face. Additional strain that may result in added unemployment is a matter to be regarded very seriously, for once a scheme involving grants from the Treasury is established it is most difficult to alter the position. What are the effects on industry and on the morale of the workers individually are the principal questions attaching to the application of unemployment insurance. With good trade and normal conditions of intermittent work insurance would be desirable. The character of honest workers will be preserved by their being helped by mutual insurance over a period of short work from which their standing might prove a slide dragging them down to the social scale. Applied under conditions of depressed, trad© and abnormal unemployment it may have the opposite effect, causing more unemployment and lowering of personal initiative in reliance on the State. , , _ ~ We are satisfied that at Home the scheme has done good in some directions but serious harm.in others. Before it is launched upon New Zealand we trust that the Government, arid the country will be satisfied that there is a full need for it. also that the ills attached to it in Britain can be avoided in New Zealand.