QUARTER'S FINANCES.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1799, 11 July 1913, Page 6

QUARTER'S FINANCES.

■ 9 THE CRY OF EXTRAVAGANCE. MINISTER RETORTS. Tlio Hon. J. ALLI3N (Minister for Finance) presented tho following statement of tho revenue for tile throe months ended Juno 30, 1913, compared with tho threo months ended June 30, 1912:— Juneqr. Junoqr. 1913. 1912. Inc. Dec. £ £ £ £ Customs ... 774,918 777,219 — 2 271 Stamps ... 301,582 230,9G4 73,618 — I'. and Tel. 315,896 323,539 22,357 — Land <fc Income tax 19,266 10,722 8,541 — Beer duty 27,998 27,276 722 — Railways... 954,894 935,229 19.GG5 — Registration and other fees 26,461 24,153 2,308 - Marino ... 12,465 12,730 — 265 Miscellaneous 46,322 46,556 — 231 Territorial 13,284 29,090 — 16 412 National En- 1 dowment 72,402 59,414 12,988 — Totals ... 2,598,518 2,477,498 140,202 19,182 The expenditure account for tho eamo periods was as follows:-^ PERMANENT CHARGES: Juno qr. Juno qr. 1913. 1912. Inc. Deo £ . £ £ Ji Civil list ... 7,573 7,312 261 — Interest and sinking fd. 993,651 1,001,550 — 7,899 Under spl. accounts 195,218 190,546 4,702 — Totals ... 1,196,472 1,199,408 4,963 7,899 ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS. June, June, Inc. Dec. 1913. 1912. T . , £ £ £ £ Legislative 3,907 4,011 — ioi Financx? ... 10,217 10,015 232 — P. and Tel. 110,815 80,149 30,6GG — ■ Railways ... 580,712 540,464 40,248 —' P. B'l'd'gs 11,227 13,137 1,090 — Native ■ ... 5,104 5,001 100 — Justice . ... 78,407 68,018 10,359 — Mines 6,117 4,188 1,929 — Int.. Affairs. 67,941 71,811 — 3,870 Defenoo ... 112,423 107,054 5,369 — Cus. & Mar. 29,997 27;375 2,622 — Labour ... 6,096 5,671 425 -j L. and SVy 65,030 58,031 6,399 — Agriculture 34,220 28,107 6,113 — Education 288,927 266,048 22,879 — Services not provided for 18,646 13,105 5,541 — Totals ... 1,432,810 1,302,818 133,972 3,974 1913. 1912. Ino. £ £ ■ •'& TotalsPermanent and annual charges ... 2,629,288 2,502,226 127,062 April 1, April 1, - 1913. 1912. Balance 709,508 • 807,275 Receipts 2,598,518 2,477,498 3,308,026 3,284,773 Expenditure 2,629,288 2,502,226 Balance ;... 678,738 782,547 Cash . ." 322,166 188,409 Advances 606,572 594,147 .928,738 Less Treasury bills 250,001) 678,738 782,547 Not Satisfied.

Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) sa.id that from tho figures disolosed it seemed' that wo were still waiting for the promised reform. There had been an dncreaso in expenditure not only in this last quarter, but also for the March quarter, notwithstanding tho fact that the Ward Government had' had to pay exty-a expenses on account of the election" anil the census. There was certainly room for reform. Tho Government' had been in power for its fourth quarter, and while thero had been an increase in revenue over and' above tho income, the' expenditure had exceeded the increase in the revenud. Where did the reform 001110 in if tho whole of the increase in revenue was going to bo swallowed up by increase in expenditure? Of course, the expenditure on railways and education had-increased, and would go on increasing, and ho reminded tho Government that when they were in Opposition they gave no orodit to tho party in power for having to meet tho increasing demands of the country. Now thoy found themselves in power, quito unablo to reduce expenditure, and wero simply carried like corks on the stream.

Mr. Hemes: And like corks we're on top. itlr. Russell said, they were rating downstream, and Niagara was not far away. Hard to Please. The Hon. W. H. HEERIES (Minister for Railways) replied to the-honourable member's complaint that there were no signs of reform. Was. it not, lie asked, because of reform that expenditure had increased? Was 'the honourable gentleman in favour of reducing the wages of railway servants, or was ho in favour of increasing them? For if expenditure wds too high, then must the Government cut down wages? For his part he had always been in. tavour of increasing wages, but if the Government had agreed to what the honourable gen tl em in proposed when tho Railway Bill was under discussion iaet year, tho expenditure would havo been 'still more. And then, after having got what they wanted, they would havo said: Where is the Keform Government? Thoy would have said, the Reform Government has failed to carry out its pledge to reduce expenditure. Tho real trouble in tho Railway Department when he took it over was that the wages wcro lower than in other btates, and ho had been able to increase wages. ■ Tho Government were anxious to carry out tho pledges made to the people who put theiu in. and to give increased facilities-to tho people must mean increased expenditure. Was the policy of tho Opposition to reduce expenditure by reducing wages and reducing tho facilities to the people? Mr. Witty: We don't want to see wasteful extravagance. Mr. Herries: Will you point out a single item of wasteful expenditure? And who was it who started this extravagance ? Mr. L. M. ISITT (Christchurch North) sooldcd tho Minister for seeking to charge the Opposition with wanting to reduco expenditure. All tho member for Avon bad said was by way of reminding tho Ministry that they had always in Opposition declared that the expenditure was wasteful.

Mr. G. LAURENSON (Lyttelton) followed up the argument of the member for Christchurcli North, upbraiding the Minister for now having been guilty of the same extravagance lie had condemned, while in Opposition. Mr. Allen Replies. The Hon. J. ALLEN (Minister for Finance) said it was hard to please tho honourable gentlemen on the other side of the House. If the Government had reduced expenditure, they would not have been satisfied. Opposition members: No, no. Mr. Allen said the Opposition did not see the difference between increase in expenditure that was legitimate, and extravagance. What tho Government; party had always spoken against was extravagance, ' and this was what they now wanted to do away with. They knew expenditure must increase, because the country was a growing country, but they had reduced extravagance. Mr. Hannn: What have you done? Mr. Allen: Let the honourable gentleman wait for tho Financial Statement. In order to show what had been done, ho continued, a period of at least twelve months must be reviewed. So colossal was the burden placed on the shoulders of the present Government that it would take more than a year to reiAovo it. They were taking steps to make their services more efficient. The Public Service Commissioners might not decrease tho cost of tho Public Service, but the Commissioners would make the Service more efficient, and so savo extravagance. To incroaso the efficiency of the Public Service right through was one way of cutting down extravagance.