The Dominion. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1910. THE WASTE OF PUBLIC MONEY

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 730, 1 February 1910, Page 4

The Dominion. TUESDAY , FEBRUARY 1, 1910. THE WASTE OF PUBLIC MONEY

'Some of our contemporaries have been telling their readers that:it is not fair to say that the Government has made no economies in Departmental expenditure.' Of-' course, they say, the Departmental expendi'ture for the first nine months, of the. year.l9o9-10. is: greater than \it was. for;the. first ;nine months.'-pf, 1908-9, but there has been a great saving all :tho same, a J great, reduction of the. 1908-9 figures, To be quite.fair'; this paradoxical ■ statement is not so absurd as it appears; to be'-at first sight.- The net. ; increase is.the excess of • the separate. Departmental increases, over the "sum of ■;the decreases in respect of certain other Departments. •- .'What. the Government's defenders really mean, therefore,: is that; the .Government.'has saved money by'increasing.the cost of the .Departments by a smaller sum-.than it might have, dono , had it chosen...; And; this, in' a sense, is true., A spendthrift who suddenly reduces the rate of' increase of. his' wastefulness ;, (even. if-his'. absolute, wastefulness'ris)increased)-'may certainly be said,to'.have.practised a sort of. economy.:,:ltihas also ,becn urged,, on; behalf of the .Government,

that the. increase: in .'the; expenditure for the nine months ending September, last should be considered in ; connection • with -the,; fact' that the expenditure 'on 'the . greatly increased.: This is.not. much.of an argument,;because the railways: rev-' enuo; goes/to help .the; total- revenue figures..: ;^--\ '-.;"; '}■■■■■■ :■■:.:'' ;-■-V:'' : - ;, '

But let i us' construct that ■" remain > when the railways, expenditureand revenue : \are 'left put of The following-are. full- totals for '.ther -nine !mbnths/ of the years; 1908-9 :and;: 1909-10: .^. : :> ' : -' : ■■■--:: -' '.' X ■■..""■. !/! v 1909-10..;; 1808-9.' ■'■:':-■■■' '•■■*■•■■ V. ■■/'.■:&■■:-: Eevenue. •, ...„.„'.. ■■ • 6,512,453 • ■•• 6,421,028' Expenditure ■;. ........;, 6,516,700 ;■■: 6,451,936. ,We ;have. not the. railway-returns to December.! 31,' - but;, the- ■ Gazette:: of Jariuary. 13; gives thefigures .-to December 11, .which' ia-near: enough: for :purposes of" comparison :-\ :■;.:•, ,I:.';'

v. :■'■••;■: •■■ ■'•,■ ■ ■'■:■■ ■,:.: -, 1309-10. i : ,19(M :-;.;. : ;^.:':-, -,:.- ■•&:.'••■ Kovenue ' ._i..__..> 2,10G,4€4: :.1,85!i,433 Eipenditnre.,. „..-... -~ 1,511,799. 1,432,101 The •; followirigj /, therefore; ••' are ;iho. ;totals ! . of: .the •'.revenue and expciidi- • ituro for, the- two/ periods,: exclusive: .of;the.-railways: .'..;•:' '-: ','''.'" '~/ ;!.,...-/' ''■'■■■'.'■' ~--\r. ■'■'.;•;. -; ; ■■ ■; 1909-10. - : 1908-9.- ■'.'•••■ uW.;-/;-^.,' '■£:•"■:':-,:a\ Eoyonne ■.■ ~...>...„... 4,405,989 : ; 4,565595 Expenditure: ■._..'..,-. ,5,004,901 ■ : 5,019,'745

■■Easees , .: of '\ expen. It ..will /be- seen • that'our. . Ministerialist, fripnds; were- not well advised to include;any .reference:t<v the railways .■<expenditure 'in their-, defence of .the:;. Government's claim.-to'have practise di, economy. :;F6r we<. have cut'.out.the' railways ''figures, .and. we ..find' that ~tbq excess of .expenditure . under, the other heads "■ has in- ■ croased : from;- £454,150 to; £598,912— an: increase" of - £144i762;: ; -:') '■:■ ■;.; ?,: ■ 'There^isjoho'.more argument,:.however,, that; may 'bo 'advanced :on . behalf ;of "the Government• '.that ; the increaso:;ih the expenditure includes the- increase in; ;the'-'.permanent- .ap-! .prbpriations, ;bf, which'f the : /chief: iteins arei,the', interest,on -loans and ■the. old age' pensions,' items ..that have to be Governnient hi in power; ''This usl'lesa/a defence of the , , administration,:, however,/ than-, a• strong reason %hy■ the utmost.: endeavour, should :be .made, .'byprudent; /and' govern-' ment; to meet'those growing charges without placing an ; additional:;burden on the backs of.the people. We might even say thatj' so,far; from plaoingv those:. new burdens on the taxpayers, the / Government should strive to reduce 'the already: enormous' load that - ia; carried by the public. ; . The ;Peime;' ; does ,not appear to understand 'that the. cost ■'■ of government: per -head is already so is almost without parallel in the: world—that the, actual ■ total'should;show/ a reduction each year.', It is; not'enough that the-; increases, should be smaller than they were. . The increases should 'be converted into decreases.',;li;the total expenditure only remained the

same—instead. ■of increasing—the position would ,6tilL be unsatisfactory. With a "revenue of so" high a rate. it would; be equivalent to 'arevenue 'of. about £400,000,000 a; year .in. Britain it is preposterous that, the , cost of- government should -be, only just ablo to, keep witl|ih the;.receipts; With' :sueh a high rate of revenue the public should every year be receiving huge new, concessions. Good; government and wise : , legislation—things impossible while the Waed; Administra-

fcion holds office—would in ten or fifteen; years Y set . New;. Zealand well on 'tie way to such a national stability; and , richness as has no ex-. ample in this age. . '' "