The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. GISBORNE, DEC. 7, 1906.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXIV, Issue 1952, 7 December 1906, Page 2

The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. GISBORNE, DEC. 7, 1906.

“ Speaking at the opening of the Awa“hou bridge, tho Premier said the “ pioneers who were going out to the “ back-blocks deserved every consider- “ ation at the hands of tho Govern“ment, but he pointed out that “ tho Government were now spending “at the rate of 21- millions a year on “ public works, such as roads, rail“ways, and public buildings. They “ were borrowing at the rate of one “ million a year for public works, and ‘‘ if asked for moro they might make “the position of tho country financie “ ally anything but pleasant to the “people; thorefore, people should “ take a broad view of the matter.” Thus runs part of press message appearing in anothor column, and we desire to emphasise the advice that “ people should take a broad view of the matter ” if it is tho unalterable de ■ sire of tho people to hug closely to the old adage that “ the King can do no wrong ” and that tho Government of a democratic country should have as much license as the King. There is a i suspicion extant, however, that taking “ a broad view ” of such matters is not the best way of ascertaining the exact position of affairs, and a closer enquiry substituted for tho “ broad viow ” will reveal a very different aspect of the matter from that which the Premier intended should be tho generally adopted one. To say that we are “ spending at the otto of 2\ millions a . year on public works, such as roads, railways, and public buildings ” sounds very fine and large under tho “ broad view ”; but when we come to enquire into the details of that expenditure it will be found that the settlers, especially those who roside in the back--blocks, had better let go tho old notion and neglect the " broad view ” by taking a closer view of the items. They will then see how general statements and flowery speeches may mislead them, as it could not fail to do in this instance. “We are spending at the rate of 2\- millions a year,’’ says tho Premier; jbut how? Is it all spent usefully, or for tho benefit o£ settlement and the advancement of the colony’s interests ? Let us take the throe headings particularised by Sir Joseph, and after particularising a few of the items under these headings culled at random fro® tho detailed

accounts and estimates passed by the House, and then louvo it to those who would like to take tho “ broad view ” to tind out how an affirmative annwor can bo given to tho lattor question. For tho copstru'dion of roads thoro is no less a sum than £32,710 sot down to bo spout during tho year oil tourist rentes, while tho back-blocks settler is sticking in tho mud and cannot benefit from that bum. On railway construction out of tho £887,000 to bo spout will bo found £20,000 for tho Hoki-tika-Koss extension estimated to cost about £ LUO,OOO when complete, and which will never return one per cent intorcut upon tho cost, £15,000 for a political branch lino into the base of Mount Egmont, £OO,OOO for tho doviation of tho Uontry Hill-Now Plymouth lioo which might havo remained where it is and has boon for the past twenty-five years without any public inconvonienoo and several other items that are equally wasteful and unnecessary. 'i'ueii as to public buildings, one cau hardly overlook the political Post and Telegraph Offices and town clocks that havo cost a lot of money ; but it is only fair to the prosent Premier to say that probably the most glaring instance of wastefulness under this heading that wo know ot was not sanctioned by him, although bo was thou u 3 now the head of the Department. Wo refer to the Nelson Post uiiioo opened a low days ago by air Joseph Ward himself, whore bo* tween £OOOO and £7OOO has been, spent in tho face of strong opposition j from throe-fourths of tho business firms of that city, who wanted, not a now Post Office,,placed on a block of submerged land owned by a syndicate and far removed from where a Post (jJILce ought to be, and merely to please tho sjndicatois and a few political friends, but the improvement of the Old Post Olliee at an estimated cost of £ISOO, which the business people of Nelson itself alleged in more than one petition against the larger expenditure, would suffice for the next twenty years. The late Premier was responsible for that piece of folly ; but the present Premier can hardly lind a sufficient excuse for a vote of £iooo granted to tho builder of the head offices of tho Hail way Department iu Wellington contrary to the advice of the departmental officers and, wo believe, without their knowledge. The contract price for this building was £27,000 and some £2700 was paid for extras without the iniliction of a penny overtime penalty, although the contract was eighteen months overdue when finished, so that the building contracted for at £27,000 cost roughly £3-1,000 eighteen months after the contract time was up. That’s a sample of Government business and economy ; but in regard to the gratuity of £3OOO paid to tho contractor we beg of you to hold your breath and say nothing, for tho contractor, who pocketed only halE .the sum, was president of the local branch of the great Liberal and Labor Federation, and a would-be Pariiamentaiian, while his solicitor who raked in the other half to squar accounts is a member of tho grea> Liberal party in the House of Bepresentatives. Thus will bo eeon the absolute necessity of taking “ a broad view of tho matter ” as advised by the 1 Premier, and of not enquiring too closely into the details of the 21millionß of annual expenditure for which hard-working settlers and i workers of all descriptions are saddled with interest. But the Premier had something more to say on that occasion. “He and his colleagues,” he said, “ and every member of Parlia " snoula say me Government were not “ anxious to help farmers, or would do “ anything to hurt the farmers, or “that their policy was inimical to the “ bost interests of farmers, to accept “ his statement that this was entirely “contrary to tho wishes and aspirations of members of tho Ministry, “ and ho for one w r ould not be a party “to anything of the kind.” Do you believe him ? It you do, will you kindly explain how tho foliosving items of expenditure to be taken out of the public purse will help the farmers or anyone else save tho recipients ? Under the heading o’ votes for miscellaneous services the following items may bo found :

“ Cost of portrait of late Bt, Hon, B.J. Seddon 4105 Expenses in connection with decease and burial of late Bt. Hon. B. J. Seddon 1,150 Expenses incurred during last visit of late Bt. Hon. B. J. Seddon to Anstralia 579 Grant to widow of late Bt. Hon. B. J. Seddon, Premier of colony 6,000 National Memorial to late Bt. Hon, B. J. Seddon 15,000 Total Seddon votes, not including salary 423, S3l Donation to San Erancisco Bc< lief Eund 1,000 Donation to Japanese famine ... 1,000 Donation for relief of distress caused by Mount Vcrsuvius eruption 250 Entertaining guests at International Exhibition 1,000 Grant for expenses of Exhibition 6-1,500 Total 467,500 Grand total 491,331 Not a bad yoar’3 record for items that do not come under permanent headings, and yot they are only a few also taken at random. Hut don’t forget; “should anyone say the Government wore not auxious to help the farmers, or would do anything to hurt the farmers (ex' cept to take their money and give it to someone else) well, don't believe them. Just lake the “ broad view;” the Liberal ono, and pay up when the taxpayer asks you.