The Dominion. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1910. THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 965, 4 November 1910, Page 4

The Dominion. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1910. THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.

The full particulars of the public accounts for the first half of the current financial year, which we summarise in another column, come at a time when they cannot hope to rocqive much attention from the House. Yet they are well worth attention. The most striking fact is a large increase m the revenue, duo largely to "the increased., taxation imposed by the Government and to the increase in tho railway fares; And in the face ot this increase the Government has just imposed a still further burden upon the people. The necessity for tins over-increasing -load of taxation is furnished by the Government's inability or unwillingness to make any serious attempt to put a check upon the rapidly-rising expenditure. For the. half-year—April 1 to September ■so—the expenditure again oxceeded the revenue. Tho increase in the e.xr penditure as compared with the first half of the preceding financial year (1809-10) was no less than £272,3p0. Although the Prime Muuskir has for a long time bean making preposterous statements about the sav> ings ho has effected in the Departments—he has given various figures, ranging from £300,000 a year upwards, without deigning even to at tempt to justify them—the grim fact remains that tho Departmental expenditure was greater,- by over £100,000-by £108,480, to be oxactduring the first half of tho current year than during the first half of 1909-10.- This is what the Prime Minister calls retrenchment. It should be obvious to everybody that tho finances of this, the best revenue country in tho world, ,-ind one of the most highly-taxed countries in. the world, and, a country that pays, for a-'larger proportion of its needs by borrowing than any other country in the world, would show a deficit under lts'prescnt management were ;:ot this extortionate taxation imposed upon the people. There is one other point in the accounts that requires' attention, Tho Prime Minister, ip last year's Budget, pleaded a new obligation of £300,000 a year in respect of defence as a justification for the immediate increase of taxation to the extent of £448,000 a year, He lately defended the further extortion under the Land and -Income Tax Bill on lie same ecoro. Will it bo believed that this new load of taxation is shown, by the figures in last night's Gazette, to have been imposed on a false pretence 1 For the half-year ended September 30' the expenditure under the heading of Defence was only about £1900. greater than during tho first half of the. financial year 1909-10. Tho expenditure under the Naval Defence Act of last year is only £130,000 to date, and it came out of loan's, so that the revenue (under the head of Permanent Appropriations) had to ■ bear a sum that may have been a five-pound note, and could not possibly have exceeded £2600 (4 per cent on £130,000 for sixmonths) or £1300 (if the money was raised in the second quarter). Thus, although the new defence burden has been practically, nil, the large revenue from the now taxation of last year and the further taxation of this year has.boon swallowed up. What is going to happen with the extravagance that is going, on when the new cost of defence really begins? Fresh taxation, and still further taxation,, if the present Government can keep in office. And all this could be avoided by the practice of reasonable economy in administering the affairs of the country.