The New Zealand Times. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1917. PENSIONS AND ALLOWANCES

New Zealand Times, Volume XLII, Issue 9794, 18 October 1917, Page 4

The New Zealand Times. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1917. PENSIONS AND ALLOWANCES

Tho settlement of the pension question in tho House of Representatives on Tuesday night will probably not satisfy the public. If the matter depended on tho discrepancy between tho aggregate of increase asked for and the aggregate offered by the Government very few would call the settlement reasonable, because most men look at this as a matter of bargain, and a frequent way of fixing bargains is to “split tho difference.” In this instance, how ewer, tho request on one side was for a million, in round figures, and tho offer on the other not much above half a million, and the “spilit-the-diffcrenco” theory cannot apply. Were it a question of want of sufficient illumination from tho general course of the debate iu the House, the debate would justify dissatisfaction. Not because there was nothing illuminating in it—for the illuminating point was made very prominent if only by two speakers —'Sir John Findlay andi Sir Joseph Ward —but for the reason that the discussion was chiefly smappv, exaggerated, and with but few elements in it of the dignity, care, and sense of proportion which the subject requires, as well as the earnestness which was, of course, present in abundance. If it was merely a question of fact as to the adequacy, the public would have a right to feel dissatisfied. This, not because of tho impression that might have been conveyed, by the misleading criticism which treated tho undoubted increase offered by the Minister as if it was limited to tenpenoe per week per man. That mayhave been smart and clever, but it was misleading ou the real question before the House, though valuable as showing a determined hostility to the Government. Standing by itself, the increase we have no hesitation in regarding os insufficient. The wife, we agree with Mr Payne’s amendment, ought to have more than twenty-one shillings and tjje child not less than ten.

But the increase does not stand on its ownmerits. Tho Government insists that in prudence it can go no further; that, in fact, it has stretched the financial power at its command to the very verge ot the safety limit. That, as Sir John Findlay reminded the House, is the leading consideration. The Government told tbe majority of the House in caucus assembled that tho addition it was prepared to make to tho allowance system was quite as much as the finances of the country could be required to stand just now. In presence of that statement, backed as it was by Sir Joseph Ward speaking in fuller detail, and with tho weight of the whole Finance Department, only two courses were open to tho House —to either accept the statement or reject it. Accepting it tho majority would retain only tho right to make a wry face; rejecting it the majority’s first duty would be to throw the Government out of office. Tho latter course would not turn on the question of whether the country is strong enough to find the money eventually, or at all, but upon tho question of the methods of taxation available for supporting the finance. We had during the debate as we have had during other debates, a great deal of discussion of the merits of various taxes, land, income, export, graduation of all sorts, Customs. But these are all debatable matters which are at present in the grave of the party hatchet, reposing for —it was thought when they were interred the whole period of the war. It is therefore quite useless to argue the question of any one of them or all of them on the floor of the Houso. That way there la no result except Parliamentarv quarrelling. The only course for the House would bo to oust the National Government and substitute a Government having the majority support on some one or other of tho * fiscal questions underlying the treatment of the system of providing for soldiers and their dependents. But the trouble is that the House is so

divided that it cannot find a majority strong enough to Keep a Government cf any pronounced colour in office. The Government could find a way out by appealing to tho country. But on this point the Houso is as hopeless as a jibbing mule at the point of death. There was m course hut to accept tho explanation of the Government and po on. This tho House did by a' majority of 41 to 13, all the Ministers, of course, voting on the Government side—nine of the 17 Liberals going with them, the other eight going against, together with four Labour members and one Reformer, those of the Reform Party in tho House at the time voting with the above exception, in a block for the Government. These figures are really tho most illuminating part ot the debate. Rather than face a fiscal issue, which it will not let the country solve, the House accepted the Government proposals. For tiic country there remains some cause for meagre satisfaction. After ah the provision for the soldiers and dependents comes out something better than was at first proposed. It is the old consolation of the half-loaf.

This, however, ought not to close tho matter for good. The decision brings us in sight of the old theory that economy is iu itself an income. Only the other day the Prime Minister. on this very account, if we construe the signs of the time rightly, mentioned his readiness for a committee of inquiry supplemented by a Royal Commission. This met the • fiticisra which was denouncing tho system exposed by tho Finance Mm-, ister under which tho Defence Department spent, without control (ouls.cle of itself), tho money which the Treasury was obliged to find without inquiry. Since this tho Finance Minister has denounced tho system with the vehemence of a much-worried man of nervous temperament objecting to serious addition to his troubles. The debate on tho cost of living and the Food Controller proposal was, it will be remembered, the occasion. This is a serious reinforcement in the support of a proposal which requires no support. Tho addition of four millions to the weight of loan _ money to ho extracted this year, bringing up the aggregate to twenty-eight millions, startled tho public last week and deadened the public keenncs s for increasing the military provision funds. Hie largo loom of millions is an imperative call for economy, and that carries with it the call for investigation into the expenditure of the most expensive of our State Departments, and its control. The logical consequence of tho two recent decisions the Pension system, and the two Ministerial explanations which failed to explain the sudden mvstcrious addition of toui millions to the loan policy already standing at twenty-four, is plam._ H is the appointment of a Commission to investigate and report on the system of administration.