PATRIOTIC FUNDS

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 303, 18 September 1919, Page 6

PATRIOTIC FUNDS

RETURNED SOLDIERS AND THE Y.lii.C.A. SOLDIERS' FINAL COMMENT Tho general secretary of tho N.Z.R.S.A. has issued the following final comment on the recent reply of the Y.M.C.A.:— The R.S.A. concurs in the Y.M.C.A. opinion-'thai "no further results can bo obtained by carrying on a protracted newspaper correspondence," and regrets that the Y.M.C.A. should have so recently Keen converted to .this view. It is as wett that the Y.M.C.A. should recognise* it as a. pool' substitute for tho full inquiry which it professed "to court." The Y.M.C.A. now proposes to invite "inquiries" at its office. What tho public isinterested to know is just why tho Y.M.C.A. so steadfastly refuses to approve of an impartial commission 'to pronounce it guiltless ■of the charges of which it protests its innocence. Tho references to particular items have noir nanwetl themselves down to assertion and denial, the continuance of which will not settle the matter. It is worth noticing, however, that tho Egyptian accounts are still "on the way to New Zealand"—it ds to be hoped they will arrive in time for tho commission. Tho Y.M.C.A. asserts that tho buffet at tlie Ked Triangle Hut on Lambton Quay was never run for profit. Had it been so it would have been unique even among the various business undertaking which the balance-sheets reveal. But the point is that the meals were duly charged for, and, if the Y.M.C.A. endeavours to qnlist sympathy by oharacterising as "a gross attack on the ladfe who gave their time and services voluntarily" tho faot that tho fl.b.A. I should 'have drawn public attention to tho difference betwen-a revenue of JA£> I ami a. gross outlay of some JE2300, the R.S.A. can only point out that had the enterprise been weighted -with the value of these services the figures would huvo been even worse. Since'the Y.'M-.C.A. haa raised the.question, it may be stated that'the real reason why the EjS.A; did not make a protest eighteen months ago is that it then aucepted at its face value-as, seemingly, many of the public still. do—the. oft-re-peated statement of tho Y.M.C.A. that, it is aljove all things an organisation conducted and controlled by business men.

The Missina Reoort. The mystery surrounding tho ownership of the auditors' report on the balancesheets published a 6eemingly impenetrable. Any tyro knows that the report bears the same kind of relation to tho balance-sheet that the letterpress beara to the- illustrations in a guido book. Each is integral to the othor. Tho Y.M.C.A. seems to have intimated, however, that while it owns-and hae published—the financial statement, it cannot even secure permission to. publish the key to the statement-namely, the report. The fact in particularly important, because while few can read balance-sheets many .call read' reports. The War Funds Act on the point, reads as follows:— Section 20. (1) On the completion of tho audit of any war fund the Audit Office shall forward to the Minister a report as to tho result of such audit, together with a 'certificate, in such form as may be prescribed, as to tho regularity or otherwise of payments to or from tho fund. (2) Forthwith," on the receipt of such report and certificate the Minister shall cause the same to be published in such manner ns he may direct, or may cause to be published ; in' lioii thereof a statement setting forth tho material parts of sucli certificate and report.

The questions which now arise are what stops the Minister will take, and bow did the Y.M.C.A. come to publish balance-sheets which aro apparently Government property without being a'ble to obtain their counterpart—the report.

■ '.The Accelerated Publication. The Y.M.C.A. diseugenuously suggests that, as'" the B.S.A. statement appeared on August 14, and the I.iU.U.A. mduimsheet on August 18, tub U.S.A. action did not accelerate tho production of the balance-sheets. This piece of bluff is particularly The original letter of tho U.S.A. to tho Minister was. dated Juno G, 1919. Tho U.S.A. has definite evidence that tho YAI.C.A. was awaro prior to the date mentioned that it was taking action, and if tho Y.M.CA. is concerned to persist in its statement the U.S.A. will proUucß such evidence. The fact tnat a deputation of. protest/ from the Y.AI.C.A, had waited on another Minister was one which the Minister for \?ar Funds himself firs!) disclosed to the R.S.A., which had surmised tho identity of the "other" Minister in question. It was obvious that the deputation referred to could not have waiteu on the Eon. G. W. liussell, but the Y.M.C.A. characterises as ,"a very serious mistake" a suggestion inadvertently conveyed by the K.S.A. statement that lie was ■ the Minister referred do. The question of,present Var work which the Y.M.C.A. confesses to have been dealt with by tho deputation, is,' contrary to the Y.M.C.A. assertion, one of tile identical points raised by the U.S.A.

: Alleged. Mis-statement. The suggestion of tho Y.M.C.A. that tho 11.5.A. .has been guilty ot" a misstatement of fact in reference to a bal-ance-sheet dealing with tho period up to October 1. 11)16, looks very damaging to tho R.S.A. case until the facts are examined. The R.S.A. was, in order to be fair, dealing solely witii the summarised balauce-sheetsrecently published. Ihe balance-sheet which tho Y.M.C.A. suggest that tho R.S.A. wilfully ignored, certainly dealt with the onrlier period. It shows alliance of .£24,350 subsequently included in the income and expenditure ' account in the general statement, but tho income and expenditure account also shows amounts as follow:— Add remittances to London by Christchurch prior'to receipt of above,..£9ooo; transfer of funds, Wellington Committee, Bs. 9d. Neither ot these items is traceable to the so-called "balancesheet," which is only a summary of Christchurch operations. The only statement which would .be of any use is a Dominion one for this poriod, and the Y.M.C.A. is ingenious enough "to leave the public to draw its own conclusions" as to the motives of tho B.S.A. in declining to admit it as such. Before the YM.C.A. completes its threatened withdrawal from, the field it might well inform the public to which it appeals whether such a Dominion statement is in existence covering this period, and if not, whether it is ever likely' to be. Certainly the U.S.A. has seen no hmt of the existence of any such statement. Tho R.S.A. is prepared to prove the solidity of its contentions, arid, osjiecially in connection with "administration mid working expenses," will justify its deductions before a commission such, as is asked for. Tho R.S.A. cast no reflection whatever on tho auditors concerned, either in England or in the Dominion. Thev are quite aware that all these gentlemen were responsible for was to check the accounts and documents submitted to them, and that is all they have publicly certified to, and then only in a qualified manner. The percentage of administrative expenses to gross revenue, quoted by the Y.M.C.A., viz., 3.8 per cent., is noj; certified to in cmy way by tho auditors named, and is a ridiculous dnirn on tho face of the figures published on August 18. . It is one of tlip many matters that can only bo cleared up by a commission of inquiry.. lii reference to the demand for a commission, the R.S.A. understands that tho matter is being reconsidered by tho Government and confidently, expects a satisfactory announcement at an early date.