The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 1912. A FINANCIAL OUTRAGE.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1536, 4 September 1912, Page 6

The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 1912. A FINANCIAL OUTRAGE.

Thb people will have good reason for the astonishment and indignation with which they will read to-day the details of the Ward Government's costly blundering over the problem of housing Parliament. Most people have imagined that about £50,000 or so would cover the expenditure and liabilities in connection with tho_ rebuilding and repairing schemes since the fire of four yeara ago: nobody ever imagined that the actual figure is over £160,000. The details were given in a return presented to Parliament yesterday. The new Government House and grounds accounted for £57,844; the patching and tinkering of tho old Government House (in which Parliament now sits) has cost £15,994; the temporary residence, of the Governor , at Palmerston North absorbed £4877; the sum of £11,983 was spent in repairs and additions to the unburned portion of the old Parliament House; the ' discharge of Fiuxn's contract cost £8826; and tho cost of the work in the present Parliament House grounds which was so hurriedly put in hand is estimated to reach £63,000—a total of £162,920. That this is a shameful waste of money, on a scale which is amazing even for what was the most extravagant and improvident Government the country has known, cannot be disputed. It was not disputed in the House yesterday. Before the fire the State possessed a satisfactory Government House and an adequate House of Parliament; to-day it possesses what may be a satisfactory Government House and a makeshift Parliament building, and it has incurred expenditure and liabilities far greater than the total cost of any reasonably built new House of Parliament need have, or would have, cost. The late Government took almost the most extravagant and unbusinesslike course open to it. We do not say that the position created by the fire was one which could be instantly, effectively, and economically dealt with, but the Government could easily, had it cared, have avoided the extreme of During the session of 1908 the Government outlined a large and comprehensive scheme of restoration, involving the abandonment of the Departmental buildings in Lambton Quay, and Sir Joseph Ward over and over again declared, in reply to the Reform Party's criticisms, that the expenditure contemplated was £1)0,000 on a new Parliament House, £25,000 for a new Government House, £20,000 for new Government Departments, and whatever was necessary for a site for his Excellency's residence. Now we see that that total has been exceeded already with nothing to show for i.ho I new Parliament House ■ excectinjc a

jumbled mass of foundations and a foundation stone decorated with tho names of tho men who so woefully blundered and so shamefully wasted the money of the taxpayers. The truth of tho matter is that the Ward Government cared nothing for economy; and we may be quite sure that had it remained in office the total cost of. the whole scheme, when completed, would haVe exceeded the halfmillion estimated by the Opposition in 1908 by as much as Sir Joseph Ward declared that that estimate exceeded the outside possibility of ex- , penditure. Had the Government simply proceeded to rebuild on the old site Parliament could now have been properly housed for a smaller sum than has been flung away. There could be no more effective condemnation of the late Government's gross extravagance and folly than the fact that 11 ii. G. W. Bussell, when the return was presented yesterday, instantly recognised that the bald figures of the return would greatly damage the party to which he belongs. Ho denounced the return as "a most unfair one," "intended to bo used for political purposes against the Ward Government 1 Nothing that we or anyone clso could say could bo a more damning indictment of the Ward Government than this unstudied protest by one of its supporters. Mr. Uussell did not dispute the figures; he could not say the.v told more or less than the arithmetical truth of the matter. It was because they were true, and because they were figures that spoke for themselves, that he objected to them. As Mb. Herdman said, the doctrine involved in the protest by the member for Avon was an "extraordinary" one; but it is the doctrine to which the Spoils party was always faithful. Were the Spoils party in office, Parliament and the public could almost have expected to see the sun fall from tho skies_ sooner than to see the return which was presented yesterday. The idea of the Spoils party plainly is, that facts and figures proving their misgovernment'or bad administration must not be made public. If tho publication of facts and figures of great-public interest and importance will damage the Spoils parfcv, so much the worse, not for the facts this time,-but for the Spoils party. The scandalous waste of the public's money for which the Ward Government has been responsible in this matter will be recognised as such an outrage that tho public will be more ready than ever to solidly support the new Government in its task of retrieving the losses and clearing up the mess.