"MUDDLED."

Auckland Star, Volume LVIII, Issue 234, 4 October 1927, Page 8

"MUDDLED."

EDUCATION BOARD ACCOUNTS.

WELLINGTON ATTACKED. MISAPPLIED FUNDS. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Monday. An attack on the administration of the Wellington Education Board and the attitude of the Minister of Education in the matter was made by Labour members in the House this evening.

Mr. P. Fraser (Wellington Central) quoted freely from a file of correspondence between the Education Department and the Wellington Education Board, declaring it showed that the administration of the board was most unsatisfactory. Government officers reported that the board's system of accounting was most unsatisfactory, that what looked like false claims had been made against the Department, and that trust funds amounting to over £5000 had been misapplied. Before he left office Sir James Parr had come to the conclusion that no further Government grants should be made to the Wellington Education Board, but in spite of this the present Minister had recommended the Cabinet to grant £3000 to the board.

Mr. R. McKeen (Wellington South) I said to put the board on a proper solvent . basis £9000 would be necessary. The Minister of Education, Hon. R. A. Wright, said Sir James Parr had agreed on certain conditions to grant the board between £8000 and £9000. Those conditions were not accepted by the board, and a grant was not made, but Sir James Parr was willing to grant a much larger sum than he (Mr. Wright) had asked the Cabinet to grant. So far as the accounts were concerned, there was nothing more than muddle, but those accounts were certified by the Audit Department. Ine statement there was misappropriation of funds was the wrong term to use; all that had happened was that the iunas of one account had been used to pay obligations of another account. Money may thus have been misapplied. Mr. E. J. Howard (Christchurch) said there was an obligation on the part of members of public boards to investigate the affairs of a board when they got into a muddle, and he could not understand how a Minister of the Crown could de♦J? emberr for not doin g so- Hp wanted to-know who was responsible for e muddle of this board's accounts, and who was responsible for what Sir James rarr called misappropriation of the! board s moneys. He thought the Prime Minister would like to have this matter cleared up, and to give him a chance of aoing so he moved as amendment to the i motion before the House—a motion to < go into committee on the Estimates— ,

that in the opinion of the Home flt [ position of the Wellington Edqptfka Board should be fully investigated. Mr. J. A. Lee (Auckland East) aaii according to the Minister's lino of aigtr ment anything might be done, then could be no offence so long as the Aafit. Department did not find it out. 11l Minister claimed there was no harm i> the misapplication of money so long at the result was satisfactory.. Una the board might have a "punt" on and there would be no harm so long ai Limerick won. He seconded the amendment.

A division was taken on Mr. Howard's amendment, which was defeated by H votes to 15.