PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Hokitika Guardian, 22 February 1930, Page 7

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

HOW ( MONEY COPIES AND GOES,

THE CONSOLIDATED FUND (Taxpayer.)

“The Ordinary Revenue Account of the Consolidated Fund,’’ the Government Statistician tells the public 'in the recently issued Official Year Book, “covers the ordinary revenue and expenditure of the General Government. apart, that is, from capital items, commercial and special undertakings, advances and so forth.” “Until recent years,” tin’s authority adds, “its operations afforded an excellent comparison of State revenue and expenditure from year to year; but changes in system during the last few years have largely destroyed the comparability of the figures.” For this destruction, it is scarcely necessary to say, the Government Statistician is in no way responsible. Nor is the Controller and Auditor-Gener-al. It is the work of the Treasury, where Ministers of Finance, as they come and go, reign supreme. The most noteworthy of those changes, it seems, came into operation from the beginning of the financial year, 1925-26, when the railway revenue and expenditure were removed from the Consolidated Fund and placed n a separate account styled the Working Railways Account from which the Consolidated Fund received in each of the four financial years, 1925-26 to 1928-29, an amount tc cover interest on railway capital liability, while the Consolidated Fund, in turn, paid to the Working Railway Account an amount sufficient to make good the losses on isolated sections and branch lines. Then the Finance Act of 1929, with the advent of a new Ministry, reduced by £8,160,009 the amount on which interest was to bo met by the Working Railways, and discontinued the subsidy to isolated sections and branch lines. REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE, Legislation of a similar character appears to have revolutionized the finance of the Post and Telegraph Department. From the beginning of 1928-29 the revenue and expenditure of this Department, according to the Government Statistician’s statement, “was placed quite outside of the orbit of the publio accounts.” “In place of the revenue of the Post and Telegraph Department, “it is explained, “the Consolidated Fund now receives merely an amount to cover interest on capital liability, while there is now no Consolidated Fund item of expenditure corresponding to that of tlie Post and Telegraph Department in 1927-28 and in previous years.” In face of these facts the Statistician tells a bewildered publia that “in any comparison of Consolidated Fund revenue and expenditure over a series of years it is desirable to omit railways and postal items altogether,” Following this advice, omitting, that is, the railway and postal figures, one obtains the following summary of the revenue and expenditure of the Consolidated Fund during the last ten years.

Year. Surplus. 1920 2,290,816 1921 6,192,231 Year. Deficit. 1922 339,831 Year. Surplus. 1923 1,315,683 1924 ' 1,812,365 1925 ... 1,243,800 1926 1,155,679 1927 587,142 1928 179,075 Year. Deficit. 1929 577,252

These “adjusted figures, the Statistician states, “give a good comparison of revenue and expenditure over the period, showing an increase of £2,561,581 in the revenue and an increase of £6,146,285 in the expenditure.” Ho reminds his readers that there were deficits in the Consolidated Fund in 1922 and in 1929, the only unfortunate happenings of the kind since 1888, when Sir Harry Atkinson wa,s Prime Minister. NEED FOR REVISION. All this is interesting and useful information and the taxpayers—meaning all the people— again are indebted to the Government Statistician for having thrown light upon a. very perplexing position. There is a feeling abroad, however, that nine-tenths of the members of the present House of Representatives are but poorly informed in regard to the finances of the country and that in this respect the community is in the hands of changing mi Histories, more or less dependent upon the advice of officials, who,‘ while excellent public servants in their own sphere, should not bo saddled with responsibilities belonging to the public’s direct representatives. It lrs ibeen suggested by business men of high repute that by way of improving the Dominion’s system of account keeping the Controller and Auditor-General should ho clothed with more extended authority and required to submit to Parliament each year an independent review of the country’s financial position. Perhaps oven more useful than this would bo insistence on the part of every electorate in the country that its representative in Parliament, was familiar with the public accounts.

Year. Revenue. Expenditure. 1920 18,278.760 17,534,065 1921 24,863,967 19,269,359 1922 18,695,291 19,544,916 19,23 , 18,275.641, 19,326,128 1924 18,448,229 19,000,480 1925 19,208,315 19.726,484 1926 20,010,908 21.094,654 1927 20,211,388 ' 22,121,731 1928 19,966.244 22,459,579 1929 20,840,241 23,680,350