SOCIAL SERVICES.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 260, 2 November 1932, Page 5

SOCIAL SERVICES.

HUGE INCREASE IN COSTS. MR. FORBES ON ECONOMIES. " MOTIVES MISREPRESENTED."(By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, this day. The enormous inci-ca.se which has taken place in recent years in the Dominion's expenditure on tiic social services, was referred to by the Prime Minister in the House late last night, when replying to the Budget debate.

Mr. Forbes said that the mere use of the word "economy" seemed to be able to lash certain members of the Opposition into a state of fury. It was his opinion that it was possible to bring about reductions in the money spent on social services without interfering unduly with the benefits conferred. Such increases had been made since 1914 that the load had become absolutely beyond the powers of the country. Examples of Increases. In 1913-14 New Zealand was spending £305.093 on hospital control, but today the amount had grown to £1,103,959, an increase of 357 per cent. Education in 1913-14 cost £1,210,000, and to-day close on £3,000,000, or an increase of 240 per cent. Pensions had grown 1 from £004,000 to £3,299,000. He admitted that the increase was largely accounted for by the war, but the fact remained that the country was being asked to carry a tremendous additional burden. He did not intend to go into the merits or demerits of the increases—he was one of those who had favoured increases in the past —but all he wanted to point out wag* the staggering increase which had taken place since 1913-14. It had to be remembered also that the revenue of the country to-day was no greater than it was in 1913-14. The total cost of social services had grown from £2,123,000 to £7,380,000. Labour Advocating Extensions. "We have to remember," said Mr. Forbes, "that wc cannot allow these things to grow to such an extent that they become a burden beyond the capacity of the country." Labour members were inclined to look at one side of the balance-sheet only. They had actually been advocating an extension of services. Mr. W. E. Barnard (Labour, Napier): It can be done. Mr. Forbes: That interjection shows the state to which the Labour party would get the country if it ever got into power. We would be faced with bankruptcy. A Labour Member: You are faced with bankruptcy now. Government's Difficult Path. Mr. Forbes said it would undoubtedly be very nice to be able to do all the things which the Labour members were advocating, but they had to ask themselves whether the country could afford it. The Labour party was advocating progress along a certain road, but at the end of that road was national bankruptcy. The path of those who set out to put the national finances on a sound footing was a very difficult one. Their motives were misrepresented and they were called callous. If the Government had refused to face the position the country would have been in a much more serious plight than it was to-day.