The Cost of Local Government.

Press, Volume LXVII, Issue 20414, 8 December 1931, Page 8

The Cost of Local Government.

The campaign of the Associated Chambers of Commerce for a reduction in the cost of government should redirect attention to a proposal made by Mr Forbes last February for a Royal Commission to investigate the incidence of jocal taxation and the possibility of cutting down the cost of local government. In the course of his statement on the national finances Mr Forbes used these words: ■ There is no • doubt that good communications, and the revolutionary development of road transport, have rendered it quite unnecessary to have bo many local authorities, and it is evident that considerable relief to rural ratepayers would result from a general overhaul and reorganisation of these authorities. ; The subject 'was further referred to in the Budget of the following July, which pointed out thdt there were in NVw Zealand the absurdly large number of 299 rural local authorities, whose total administrative expenses—£33o,ooo a year—amounted to nearly 15 per cent, of the receipts from rates. On this occasion a definite promise was made to set up a Commission, but since the formation of the Coalition the matter has hardly been referred to. There is a healthy prejudice in this country against Royal Commissions, which are too frequently a means of shelving awkward subjects, but the problem of local government is so involved that it can only be tackled after a complete enquiry. Ever since the abolition of the Provinces in 1871 our local government system has been developing piecemeal in response to rapidly changing social needs, with the result that it is now hardly worth call-

ing a system. It is a remarkable fact that there has never been any official enquiry into local administration in New Zealand, or even into any important aspect of it, such as rating. The opportunity to make good this neglect ought to be welcomed by the new 1 Cabinet, for here is one of those too rare opportunities to economise and improve at the same time. One "warning must, however, be given. It will be not the slightest use appointing a Commission on which experts do not predominate, and it vrould be almost as well not to begin at all if most of the time were spent in taking evidenceufrom representatives of local bodies and interested Government Departments. The recent Local Government Commission in Britain fell ..into this error and wasted more time and money than it is pleasant to contemplate. Although it is not easy to get experts on local government, Cabinet might consider the advisability of getting the help of an 1 expert from Eqgland, preferably s from the Department of Health, wbi<jh has accumulated a vast store of special ~ knowledge on local government in all parts of the world. Besides, England's t.- recent experiments in de-ratirig ought £ to provide interesting data for any », country which is, like New Zealand, lr worried by the burden of local rates.