Except census figures; but there again the trouble with census figures, as the leader of the opposition is aware, is that because of the magnitude of the task you do not get the figures until much later, and then they do not represent an existing situation. It may be remembered that last year the United States set apart an amount of something like $5,000,000, or possibly more, for a census of the unemployed. The census was taken through the post office, and when it was completed the head of the census, who was a prominent industrialist in the United
Relief and Agricultural Distress
States, acknowledged that he could not say definitely whether the unemployed numbered
7,500,000 or 10,000,000. There was that much uncertainty. The figures, moreover, were not available until some months later, and it just happened that those were months when there was a marked increase in unemployment in the United States, which was known to everybody. I think the method of registration which we have in operation at the present time is as effective as could be devised under the circumstances. Certainly it enables us, within what I acknowledge is some margin of error, to determine the fluctuations in the actual conditions.
To return to my original statement, in January, 1938, fully employable persons on aid numbered 161,000. In relation to our population that figure is far less than the United States figure, and I believe I am correct in saying that it is proportionately less than the figure of unemployed in Great Britain, despite the great industrial activity now existing in that country.
Subtopic: MEASURE FOR ALLEVIATION OF UNEMPLOYMENT AND AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS