" ON THE DOLE "
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] SIR,—It seems to me very unfortunate that you should have given prominence in your issue of July 17th to the article by Mr. Walter Greenwood, and in particular the mis- leading innuendo as to the relief generally afforded by Public Assistance Authorities to the able-bodied.
It is incorrect to say that " the instructions for the guidance of Public Assistance Committees provide a scale of 10s. for a man, 10s. for his wife, and 2s. for each dependent child." Mr. Greenwood should know that the relief to be granted by a Public Assistance Authority is in the discretion of that Authority, subject to the right of the District Auditor to disallow excessive payments, and that even the Minister of Health has no power to prescribe a scale. Admittedly there is need for more uniformity and in some areas an increase in the scales.
The scale mentioned by Mr. Greenwood may be that adopted by some particular Authority, possibly in Scotland. He admits that even his so-called scale may be increased " but not in excess of the amount the case would receive from Unemployment benefit." This admittedly is the practice of some Authorities, as they hold the view that a man on relief should not be in a better position than a man drawing benefit, but if there is greater necessity, such as on account of high rent, a larger sum can be given and is in fact given.
Then he goes on to refer to the Glasgow practice. He does not indicate that this practice is quite different to that adopted by many other Authorities.
Do not think that I am trying to " bolster " up the Poor Law System. Many changes are needed, but any criticism if it is worth considering at all should be based on accurate information and not misleading generalisations from par- ticular cases.—Yours faithfully, JOHN Moss (Public Assistance Officer, Kent County Council).
Tonbridge Road, Maidstone.
Previous page
