Report to the ... Zionist Congress and to the Council of the Jewish Agency in ... · 1935-08-01 · 8.1935 · p. Seite 470

It was evident that the purpose which was to have been achieved by the High Commissioner's decision—taken after prolonged negotiations—had been defeated by the labour shortage which had resulted from the inadequate labour immigration. During the latter part of 1934 the position grew from bad to worse and the proportion of Jewish labour on Government works became practically nil. The Annual Report for 1934 contained no figures on the share of Jewish labour in public works. It is known that the considerable delay which occurred in the opening of the Jewish Kadoorie School was caused in part by the inability of the contractor to carry out his undertaking to employ Jewish labour on the building. The Jewish Labour Federation found itself constrained to surender even those few road building contracts for which it had tendered successfully and to pay the fines imposed for default. It was clearly impossible to recruit labour for roadbuilding at a time when building work in the towns was delayed owing to lack of hands. In such circumstances Government abandoned, to all appearances, its intention of allotting to Jewish labour any fixed share of its public works programme. 2. The Jewish Agency clearly could not acquiesce in the virtual disappearance of Jewish labour from public works which, as a result of the continued labour shortage, threatened to become an established tradition. In its discussions with the Government on the labour schedules it laid stress on the anomalous position which had been created. In its Schedule Memorandum submitted in March 1935 the Executive wrote as follows : The Executive is not in possession of exact figures in regard to the public works programme which Government expects to see carried out in the next half yeas, either under the item of Public Works Extraordinary in the Annual Estimates, or with the proceeds of the Palestine Loan. It gathers, however, that the amounts appropriated under both heads for the coming financial year will be very considerable, and it cannot but view with concern a state of affairs which makes it practically impossible for Jewish labour to obtain its due share of this important item of public expenditure. ... It would appear to be inequitable for Government, having regard to its past undertakings about the allocation of a fair share of public works to Jewish labour, to leave that promised share out of account in assessing the country's capacity to absorb immigrants, while on the other hand maintaining that the high wages of Jewish labour—which are the direct result of the inadequate immigration allowances—precluded it from employing Jews even to the extent intended. The discussion in regard to the Jewish share in public works thus centred no longer on the question of the right of Jewish labour to public employment, nor of the extent of the share to which it was entitled, but on the practical possibility of giving effect to the policy adopted by the Government. In other words, in the face of the continued labour shortage, the question of Jewish labour's share in public works became merged in the larger problem of the country's absorptive capacity and of the size of the Jewish labour immigration authorised by the Government. It was clear that without an increased quota of labour immigration—making allow- 47°