“REFORM ” FINANCE

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8338, 25 January 1913, Page 4

“REFORM ” FINANCE

This week’s “ Gazette ” contains a statement of the receipts and expenditure of the Consolidated Fund for the quarters ended December 31st, 1912 and 1911, respectively. This statement ought to contain some evidence of that wonderful “ reform ” in finance and economy in administration which the country was so frequently and confidently tokl to expect under Alasseyism. We look in vain, however, for indications of improvement. This is the second quarter the self-styled Reformers have been on the box seat. They might bo forgiven for having nothing much to show for the first three months, because they inherited tho financial arrangements of their predecessors; but surely they have now had time to get sufficiently into their stride to show something in support of those profuse protestations of pre-elec-tion days. What is the position? Sir Joseph Ward started the last quarter of 1911 with a balance of £920,239 and with' Treasury bills outstanding amounting to £400,000. He transferred £350,000 to the Public Works Fund, and finished the quarter with a balance of £763,973 and the Treasury bills reduced to £200,000. The balance was thus £156,266 less at the close than at the opening, of ilia quarter, but

when this is subtracted from the reduction in Treasury bills there is left a net gain of £43,734. Now for Mr James Allen. On September 30th last, be had £939.077 in hand, with Treasury bills outstanding to the tune of £175,000. The sum of £225,000 was transferred to public works, and the quarter closed with a balance of £943,334. Cut the Treasury bills liability was increased to £300,000. The ‘’balance at end of quarter” rose by £4307, but deducting this from the increased liability, the relation of revenue to expenditure underwent a change for the worse amounting to £120,693. Besides this, the contribution to jmblic works was £25,000 less than Sir Joseph Ward’s. Where is the promised reform —the improvement, the economy, the great savings in departmental expenses that were so glibly prophesied—where are they? It was specially in regard to those avenues of expenditure coming under the heading of “annual appropriations” that reckless charges of “squandering” and “waste” and “jobbery” were hurled_ by the self-styled Reformers at the Liberals. Yet now we find that nearly every department costs more to run. The post, and telegraph revenue is loss and the expenditure more. The railways outlay has gone up more than the income.- The Justice, Customs, Labour, Education, and Legislative Departments have all cost the taxpayer more to run than they did a year before, and the only revenue items giving, a larger return are those involving taxation. And Mr Massey and all his colleagues said they would reduce, not increase, taxation. Again, whore is the promised reform ?