THE LOAN BILL.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 648, 27 October 1909, Page 6

THE LOAN BILL.

■'■■■;.It i(3 one.of^tfie ,1 weaknesses of tho ; Prime and at tho same ■timo it on occasion scrves'him well,.that He-..is-:only ablo.to look at one side of a case. Jin his speech on the' Loan Bill last night, iforinstaricc,; ho sot himself oiit to show : that the ehorinpu's" iricreasp in :tlib indebtedness .of the Dominion during recent timos was'not a subject , for criticism, but rather, one for. congratulation. At the very worst it,was a necessary evil, if an ; evil at'all. He , quoted an» appalling list of figures to Bhow the benefits •'■ derived from lban ; money; and also to pfove sihat a large part of the money'borrowed ' was interest and there was sufficient truth inf.his";assertions to give;an appearance of'' reasonableness to his cb'ri-' tentions as a whole. We all know, that a 'certain amount, of .borrowing has. been necessary, and we all know that a porr tion of the, money borrowed has been imt mediately!. - interest earning, , But this is not really, the point at issue. The real question for the. country to consider, is how much,of .this.borrowing has been unnecessary I How much of it could have been avoided but for the extravagance of : the!. Government ?, ''.Sir Joseph: 'WARD.'-.in the course'bfhis's'p'eceh'issiied to his oppohente.what'is.iipw a.'familiar.'challenge. They'would riot dare,) he said, to say that the Government should Stop borrowing for these, purposes—the ipurppses in.quesr tion being railway 'construction, advances to settlers, , etc: :It'is perfectly'true that the. devolopihent of the country must go on, and that the system of advancing money to settlers must continue. But the Minister for Finance cannot, or will not, ; see that; if the cost of administering the affairs of the country had; riot'been allowed to increase- at: tho excessiyo rato recorded during recent years a large part of the , money required for public works arid advances to settlers would have been available' without borrowing ■ at all. There, can bo :tio questioning I this . fact. The figures are porfectly .obvious and speak for themselves.:' •; Here is a table; compiled from the official records showing the yearly/increase in the annual appropriations, that is to say the , cost of the various Departments, for a period of five-years.':—:'.■:'■.'■..'..:;••■■ .'.'■■'., : ~•; '■. '■'..'.. Seddon Government. :'■■'■■.■■'■ Annunl . Increase'on ~ ■ appropriations, .previous year., 1904-05 ..;.'. ;... 3,984,930 ::'.-.', .... 144.5GG 1905-06 ............... 4.252,233 ;.. .287,303 '...■-■•■-■■.■■■..WAED'OpVBBIIMBin , ... / : .' ~ 190M7 .........-....;. .4.-736,806 ' ■ "....' 484,573, 1907-08 .;.;.;.....5,085,844' I-,''....- 345.538 Uuo-09 •; 5,575,483 ; ... 430,139 These figures show the onormous rate of increase ,in' the cost of government under tho Ward Administration. Even the extravagance of the Seddon- Administration sinks into insignificance in coinpari- ' son. Let any unbiassed porsbn read tho figures given above arid ask himself what justification there can be for the enormous addition. recorded in the annual cost of governing this small country. What can possibly havo happened to necessitate, the expending of nearly £500,000 more,on tho cost in 1008-8 as comparod with the year previous? Of course it cannot be justified, and the proof of this lies in the admission of the'Governmerit that heavy retrenchment can bo carried out without affecting the efficiency of : the; public service. Biit our point is this: the Minister, for Finance will persist in claiming that all the borrowing that has been carried,out has been necessary. Our answer is that, a largo part of it has only'been necessary bocauso of tho extravagance of Ministers. In so short a as the Ward Administration has been in office tho annual cost of government—which of course, does not.-'includo expenditure on public works or anything of that kindhas increased by £1,323,250. That is to say that in 1008-9 it cost: £1,323,250 ,moro for Departmental expenditure than it did in 1905-e, the. last .year of Mb.; Seddon's Premiership. Allowing tho odd £323,250 for a natural increase, it leaves n million a year, which should have boon availablo to-day for public works and ftdvanccs.to settlers, without borrowing. This is an aspectof thofinancial positiori which.docs not Appeal, to the^Ministei^- for Pinarico;'

He prefers to go on borrowing, and puts forward the plausible pica that he is borrowing for a worthy purpose, ignoring tho plain fact that with careful administration much.of the money.required for that worthy purpose would be available without borrowing. If proof of this were needed it is provided in ; the fact. that despite the, enormous increase in cost of tho Departmental expenditure a.large sum has each year, for some years , until the present time, been transferred from r.cvonue to tho Public Works' Fund. It is because this money , is.not availablo this year a second loan has becomo necessary— a most unusual and unpleasant state of things. ''";,■ .■'!■'■ ■ ■ ■'■■ '■■■.-•.