The Daily News. MONDAY, AUGUST 26, 1912. THE BUDGET DEBATE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 84, 26 August 1912, Page 4

The Daily News. MONDAY, AUGUST 26, 1912. THE BUDGET DEBATE.

The debate on the Financial Statement drew its weary length to a close early on Saturday morning, when the Prime Minister replied. Mr. Massey's sutomary of the House's criticism was hot very convincing. Briefly, his epeech was like the Budget, "full of promise." The watchword of the Reforni Party, he said, was to be "Progress." This is, of course, an excellent "strange device" to inscribe upon his banner, but what the country hopes is that he will speedily add to this watchword the inscription "Performance." In a spirit of extravagant optimism the Prime Minister claims that the advent of the new Government has been characterised by "improved conditions in trade and commerce." It must have been a singularly effective Government to have accomplished this desirable end during the few short weeks it has been in office, and the bare statement was surely susceptible of some more minute illustration. Of course, as Mr. Massey has said it, it must be true, but a wicked and suspicious public would like to have the chapter and verse upon which the statement is baaed. Referring to the future, Mr. Massey said that the Government did not intend to pile up the national debt, but was going to borrow sufficient for the public works and development of the country. Just how he intends to pursue a vigorous policy of land settlement, railway construction and roading and bridging in the backblocks 1 , without raising money for the purpose, is not very obvious, and the debate has not disclosed the details of the mysterious scheme foreshadowed in the Budget of carrying on a progressive public works policy without increasing the country's indebtedness. This is "sound finance" on paper, but we must admit to a legitimate curiosity as to how this miracle is to be accomplished. It was hardly necessary, surely, for him to state that "the Government did not intend to foster any movement to increase the cost of money." Any Government that set out with the deliberate intention of increasing the cost of money would have the shortest tenure of office. Still the statement, apart from its absurdity, reads well, and Mr. Massey probably derives as much" Satisfaction from repeating it as the old lady did who found comfort in the repetition of the word "Mesopotamia." It is a little bit unfortunate,

too, that the Prime Minister should ' I have found it wise to say that "no such J programme had ever been laid before ( Parliament or the people," for the scoffer in' the market-place will quickly attach a second meaning to the expression. However, we have little quarrel with the Budget as it stands. The debate upon its proposals has been a, dreary and a uselessly-prolonged one, and it has been singularly unilluminative from both sides of the House. This, however, is a characteristic of such debates, and the Government cannot be blamed for a following of precedent. Now that ■ this preliminary canter is out of the road and its platitudinous verbosity is safely' enshrined in Hansard, where it will never be read, we shall await with interest the production of the Government's policy measures and some elucidation of the mysteries of its proposed management. We quite agree with Mr. Massey that the Government cannot be expected to deal with tariff reform and other complicated questions during its first session, and we are still prepared to give it "a run for its money," but in common with other people we are equally prepared to demand that we shall have a run for our own.