COST £9577.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVIII, Issue 291, 8 December 1937, Page 10

COST £9577.

MR. NASH'S MISSION.

"ABOUT £1000 A MONTH." FULL DETAILS CALLED FOR. (By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON*, this day. An item nf .1' t"'77. "to cover the cost uf the Miiii—it*r of Finance and staff to Great Jiritiiillw;n challenged in. the Hou-o <>f Represent atives early this morning. when the l nauthorised Expenditure Account for 1930-37 of the Supplementary Estimates was under

Mr. .1. Ibu-c-t. (Natiuonal, Awarua) ca 1 hsl attention to the vote, saying that ,£.">000 had !>>'<■ n included in the main Estimates. This brought tho cost of the cU'N'ua tion to .C!)."i 77.

I 'ho Mini-ter of Finance, Mr. Nash, -aid ono item related to last year's ex[hmhlit-lire, and the other to this year's expeudit lire.

Mr \V. J. Poison (National, Stratford) said the Minister of Finance had Ihm'u absent from New Zealand for 10 months, arid the cost worked out at about JCIOOO a month. "I have never heard of an expenditure lik© that

before," ho said. "It seems colossal. I do not know what we are coming to. Surelv if this expenditure is justified the ilinister will get up and justify it."

Tho Minister of Education, Mr. Fraser, said that, worked out on a monthly basis, it was not as expensive as previous delegations. Mr. K. J. Holyoake (National, Motucka): What about a mileage basis? Mr. Poison: Never in the history of the Dominion has it been recorded that a Minister cost the country £1000 a month on a visit abroad. It is extraordinarily bigh. Something Had Gone Wrong. Mr. Poison said he was not suggesting that the Minister had not worked hard. Ho did as much as he could. He took a staff ,with J»im f and no doubt that accounted for the high expenditure. He should give the House the facts. It ap|>eared from recent cebles and other information that something had gone wrong with the Minister's tour overseas, and tho trip would not be very beneficial to New Zealand. Mr. Fraser quoted the costs of other delegations. "If you go on a monthly or mileage basis you will find that the present Minister's expenditure compares very favourably with other visits of Ministers," he said. The World Economic Conference of 1933, Mr. Fraser proceeded, cost £6400. On that occasion not nearly so much time was spent. The Ottawa Conference in 1932 cost £4200 and the delegation was away only a few weeks across the Pacific. The Prime Minister of 1935 attended the jiibilee delegation to England, the cost being £.">OOO and the period of absence was brief. A visit of a Finance Minister to England had cost £0000 in 1035. The total cost of the delegations lie had mentioned was £19,600. '"If we send a delegation they have to be paid for," he continued. "Personally I think they are worth while." Mr. Fraser added that if the member for Kaipara (Mr. Coates) could tell "the House how to do the trips cheaper It would appeal to his (Mr. Eraser's) national sentiment. " Nq Wonder They Looked Shabby." Mr. H. S. S. Kyle (National, Riccarton) said the contingent New Zealand had sent to the Coronation had cost a little more than .£((1)00. '"No wonder they looked shabby," he added. "It was a paltry sum compared to the amount spent by the Finance Minister." Mr. Holyoake said the remarks of the Minister showed that delegations were worth while. When the Oovernnient was in opposition they had a different view. Mr. .T. A. Lee (Government, Grey Lynn): We got value this time. Mr. Holyoake suggested that there should be a pei'nianent appropriation for I such visits so that large sums would not have to be paid out of unauthorised expenditure. Mr. Nash said that of the grant of £25(Mi made to him for his expenses he had drawn only £2100 and there might still be a minor balance. He gave details of the expenses of other members of the party, and said that every penny could bo justified. The whole expenditure was slightly less than that of previous delegations on any basis. Even now the accounts were not quite settled in minor respects, but a little later he would supply a comprehensive return in detail. There was not the slightest reason why anyone should not know those details.