A PRINCIPLE AT STAKE.

Taranaki Daily News, 13 December 1921, Page 4

A PRINCIPLE AT STAKE.

The course which the Government has adopted in withholding from the publi-3 the contents of the report of the Economies Committee has been the subject of much adverse criticism. It hs not a question of satisfying mere curiosity; rather is it a matter of upholding the principle that the taxpayers have the right to know how their money has been spent—rightly or wrongly—by the State Departments, what the Committee’s investigations revealed, the nature of the principles whereon the economies recommended arc based, and the reasons why the expenditure-soared, together with all other information—except that-of a personal nature—which would enable the public to obtain some idea as to the extent of the supervision (if any) over the general working methods of such departments. There is a general impression that the Committee did its work well. That is an added reason why the details of the report should be made known, and Mr. Massey is all the more unjustified in keeping the report secret,, except from the deputation of business men who were allowed to see its contents as a confidential document, whereas it is particularly a report the public should possess. It is impossible to conjecture why this secrecy is maintained on a report involving economies of several millions. The public have a right to know exactly what the findings of the Committee were in order that they may ascertain which recommendations are being out, and which (if any) are being ignored. Possibly this may be just what the Government/ does not want the public to know. Anyhow, it is the duty of members of Parliament to insist on the publication of the report, though personal matters therein should properly be excluded. At present the refusal of publicity may well give color to all sorts of adverse ideas. Nothing is more certain than if the Government expects to retain the confidence of the people itr*must iy turn repose confidence in them. The principle involved is vital to democratic government, and Mr. Massey should be well advised to reconsider* his decision, or state exactly in the House the contents of the report, omitting only such personal references as would be injurious to members of the service.