WELLINGTON TOPICS.

Taranaki Daily News, 7 June 1922, Page 5

WELLINGTON TOPICS.

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT KEEPING. FROM ONE POCKET TO ANOTHER. (From Our Special Correspondent.) Wellington, June 2. Speaking at the farewelling of the retiring Government Printer, Mr. Marcus Marks, the Hon. G. J. Anderson, the Minister in charge of the department over which Mr. Marks has presided, stated that “under the new system of keeping accounts, which gives every department credit for what it does,” the Printing Office was not merely paying its way, but actually making a profit. The statement has provoked a good deal of discussion and some incredulity among business people here. Though largely responsible for the inauguration of the “new system of keeping accounts,” they refuse to believe that it really discloses the true financial position of the departments to which it is applied. The Government printing office has a monopoly of such parts of the Government’s work as it cares to take and it is free under this system of account keeping to make what charges it pleases for its services. There is no competition to keep its prices down and no one to complain even if they are outrageously high. SHIFTING THE BURDEN.

The heads of departments are disposed to regard the “system of keeping accounts/’ which Mr. Anderson would have the public believe has disclosed such a satisfactory state of affairs in the Government Printing Office, as a bit of a jest. Any department is free to charge at what rate it pleases for any services it renders to another department; but such charges are not recognised in the public accounts and afford no relief at all to the unhappy taxpayer. No less money is spent and no more is earned. The credits and the debits are merely paper entries which involve a good deal of work, but produce no results. In this respect the position of the railway department is the most difficult. It not only carries lime, manures, road metal, and a score of other articles at ruinously low rates, but it also carries members of Parliament, school children, distinguished visitors, its own servants and hundreds of other privileged people on similar terms. And most of them turn and throw stones at the management. INCOME-TAX. Judging from the Press Association’s summary of the Prime Minister’s speech at Invercargill last night, it followed much the same lines as did his speech at Feilding three weeks ago. Mr. Massey sticks to his guns in regard to the income-tax, maintaining that this impost is lower in New Zealand than it is in any of the Australian States, but he presents only one side of the case, which is, of course, the side to winch his taxing officers wish to give prominence. It is quite true that in the lower graduations of the income-tax New Zealand compares not unfavourably with most of the Australian States; but in the higher graduations and in the application of the tax to companies it exceeds them all in severity with the exception of Western Australia. It is particularly in the income-tax on companies, as'Mr. Massey himself has admitted, that readjustment is needed and small investors here, as well as business men, are hoping that the Ministers natural desire to demolish the arguments of his opponent will not divert his attention from the anomalies that are now crippling and even crushing commercial enterprise. PARTY AMENITIES. The members of the new LiberalLabour Party are resenting very strongly the Prime Minister's suggestion that they can reach office only by an alliance with extreme Labor. They retort that it is the Reformers, not the progressive Liberals and the sane Labourites, that stand to profit by the tactics of Mr. Holland and his friends. Tn their annoyance they recall the tact that Mr. Massey has expresed a hope that Mr. Holland will be in the next Parliament, and the further fact, as they say, that the extremists already have rendered splendid services to the Reformers at i the polls. The truth is that Mr. Massey and his advisers are much better tacticians than their opponents yet have shown themselves to be. With the existing system of election they have many opportunities to play off one section of their opponents against another and in making all possible use of them they will be simply following the example of their lopu? line of predecessors •« affLce.