The New Zealand Times. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1913. “REFORM” IN A FIX

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8347, 6 February 1913, Page 6

The New Zealand Times. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1913. “REFORM” IN A FIX

“ Tho Hon. T. Mackenzie, in a long letter to ‘ The Times,’ details the excellent returns of New Zealand’s loans, which are employed in reproductive investments.” The foregoing message, dated London, February 4th, which states no more than the truth, appeared in our cable columns yesterday, and suggests some pointed conclusions which wo propose to indicate at, the risk of giving annoyance in the circles of selfstyled Reform. Mr Mackenzie, as the High Commissioner in Loudon on behalf of the people of New Zealand, is doing his duty in circulating the facts concerning our public indebtedness. This he must have found a simple and a congenial task. But when we remember that Mr Mackenzie is the appointee of the Massey Government, we begin to think and to wonder. As one of his direct employers, the Hon. James Allen, Minister of Finance, is now in London we may he allowed to assume that what the High Commissioner has written in the columns of “ The Times” has tho endorsement of the Minister. Mr Allen being in the world’s metropolis on a special loan-raising expedition, the fair inference is that he actually inspired Air Mackenzie’s long letter detailing the “ excellent results ’’ that have followed the expenditure of this country’s borrowings in the past. Further, we are entitled to believe that this presentation of the case meets with the approval of Mr Massey and his colleagues and friends. If it does not, they are in common honesty compelled to say so immediately, before British investors become influenced by these representations, because a very lofty standard of purity is one of the first claims of this wonderful “Reform” party which praises itself so continually and so very generously. Therefore, we put it to Mr Massey, for the sake of a ‘ ‘ square deal,” that if ho has the slightest objection to the favourable report -which the High Commissioner has officially prepared for the benefit of British public and money-lenders, it is clearly his bounden obligation to announce the fact without delay. We know the difficulties of the situation. To repudiate the High Commissioner’s letter would mean the failure of the Finance Minister’s mission. Mr Allen would have to return to Wellington with empty pockets, discredited at home and abroad. But, on the other hand, what does tho acceptance of Mr Mackenzie’s statement amount top What is its obvious significance? Endorsement of tho important letter now in circulation in every financial centre of the world means the abandonment of hundreds of cock-and-bull stories upon which the present Ministers when in Opposition built tip tho whole structure of their criticism. It stultifies their every utterance concerning the public finances of New Zealand. It involves the painful confession that all the vehement, vituperative declamations about “ borrowing and squandering,” “waste andi jobbery,” “ reckless plunging,” and ‘ wild-oat finance ” were—.what shall wo say ? the grossest insincerities, to say the very least. No, that is too mild - a term. It means a confession of political dishonesty maintained over "a long period and pursued with unblushing audacity for the paltriest of party purposes. The pages of “ Hansard ” absolutely bristle with charges _ by Mr Allen alone of reckless administration of public funds; of “ unsound finance,” loans unprofitably squandered for political purposes, gross waste, multiplication of unnecessary departments, shocking increases of expenditure in all directions, and a heaping up of the public debt with complete disregard of consequences. Mr Allen must now withdraw every one of these charges and apologise for having made them—or he must contradict the High Commissioner. The Minister is on the spot, and there can be no excuse for him should he fail to do the fair thing. And how does Mr Massey stand ? Let us see. On August 6th. 1910, speaking from his place in the House of Representatives as loader of his Majesty’s Opposition, the gentleman who is now Prime Minister said; The policy of tho so-called Liberal party is to borrow extravagantly and to spend the money, not for thp benefit of the country, but for the benefit of the party in power. If that statement was true, why in the name of decency is a high public officer permitted to tell British investors that our loans have all been spent on reproductive investments and show excellent results? On July 6th, 1911, Air Massey tel da large gathering in the Wellington Town Sail that Sir Joseph Ward had that year—election year—borrowed six and a half millions of money to buy votes with! We quote from the report, in the squatters’ organ. If that is a fact, why does the High Commissioner suppress it at this particular moment? If over there was a time for the truth to be revealed, and especially concerning our financial position, surely it is now, when wo are asking investors to trust us! Of course, if Air Massey on the occasions wo have mentioned (two instances taken at random out of innumerable ones available) was merely telling fairy talcs in order to influence votes in his own favour, and is prepared now to bo candid about tho matter, wo-fihaU inpn;

where we are, Tho High Commissioner has certainly impaled the self-styled Reformers on the horns of a very awkward dilemma. If his letter is to stand —unless it is to be officially and promptly repudiated—the whole structure of “Reform” criticism of Liberal finance is admitted to have consisted oi nothing .but tho most contemptible political hypocrisy and misrepresentation Tho position is an unenviable one for those concerned, and they are not likely to get much comfort out of the reflection that it is of their own making. Wo cordially invite the Prime Alinistcr to offer some observations on the High Commissioner’s assurance in London that New Zealand loans are employed on reproductive investments in contradistinction to his own statement on the eve of the election that in one year alone Sir Joseph Ward borrowed six and a half millions of money to buy votes with.