PARLIAMENT Request To Cut Roads Expenditure Defended

Press, Volume C, Issue 29608, 2 September 1961, Page 12

PARLIAMENT Request To Cut Roads Expenditure Defended

(N.Z. Press Association)

WELLINGTON, September 1.

If the National Roads Board met the Government’s request to save 5 per cent, of its revenue and kept its credit balance of the beginning of this financial year it would have in hand at the year’s end about £2 million, said the Prime Minister (Mr Holyoake) in the House of Representatives today. He was speaking in the debate on the estimates for the Legislative Department. “I hope the board will end up with a surplus of £2 million, but it is up to them,” he said, “and without causing unemployment or upsetting industry.”

The Minister of Works (Mr Goosman), who is also chairman of the Roads Board, said the Government had not interfered with the board’s funds.

The board had unanimously agreed to cuts, he said. He did not like cutting road expenditure; but both he and the board agreed to because of the country’s economic situation. The board would still maintain a surplus, he said. Mr Holyoake added that savings made would be held in the Roads Board’s funds. Opposition members said Government members of the Public Accounts Committee had rejected Opposition requests for the Director of Reading (Mr P. L. Laing) to attend the committee to discuss projected cuts to meet the Government’s saving “instruction.” It was entirely wrong for the committee to be denied adequate information on how the £2 million was to be saved, said Mr A. H. Nordmeyer (Opposition. Island Bay). Mr W. H. Brown (Government, Palmerston North), a private motorists’ representative on the Roads Board, said the board would see that no essential works were stopped or curtailed and it would ensure there was no unemployment. The spending of the £2 million was merely being postponed.

“The Auditor - General objected to money being raised and expended without reference to Parliament. We want to know what is to be done with the £2 million that is to be saved, what works are to be curtailed and how many men will be affected, for how long the vote is to be trimmed.” said Mr Nordmeyer. Pressure On Economy Mr Holyoake said that he thought the country knew the whole economy was overcommitted. “There are considerable unhealthy pressures on our economy because of the profligate way in which the member who has just spoken committed us over the last three years to over-expendi-ture. “He knows the pressure created by the £5O million commercial bank overdrafts necessary to meet the commitments for imports irresponsibly and deliberately irresponsibly approved, in September last year.” said Mr Holyoake. Mr M. A. Connelly (Opposition, Jliccarton) also attacked the Government for refusing to allow the Public Accounts committee to examine the Director of Reading Mr Holyoake: What would you like to ask him? Mr Connelly: One thing we wanted to ask was who will bear the cut in reading spending. Will the grants to local bodies be cut proportionately? “This is a matter of con-

cern to local authorities in Christchurch where a lot of xoading work is under way,” he said. With the cut in the vote some roading contractors might be made bankrupt, and most would have their work reduced. “Proper Procedure” Mr Holyoake said it was the proper procedure for him to write to the board. A favourable reply’ was received within four hours. ‘‘l talked it over with the Minister of Works and he was in favour," said Mr Holyoake. Mr Holyoake said he suggested to the board that there should be a 5 per cent, saving in expenditure of its revenue and that the initial balance of £712,000 should be left intact. “There’s no ‘hole in corner* about this business. It's there for the whole world to know about.” he said. The former Minister of Works (Mr Watt) said National Party members of the Public Accounts Committee had denied Opposition members the right to question the Director of Reading. Questions were called for because Mr Holyoake’s letter was never fully made public, he said. Why was the letter needed when it was addressed to the Prime Minister’s own coleague. the Minister of Works? Had the Minister of Works refused to write to the National Roads Board himself?. Mr Goosman: I requested the Prime Minister to write the letter. Mr Watt recalled that Mr Goosman had said that nobody would ever interfere with the board. The board was not the outside and independent body it was supposed to be. Mr Watt said. The Government had one of its own members. Mr Brown, representing private motorists on the board

“Who does he represent, the Government or the motorists?” Mr Watt asked. Drastic cuts could not be made in expenditure without damage to the board’s efficiency, he said. Opposition Questions Mr Connelly said the Government was afraid, to have the Director of Roading before the Public Accounts Committee. Opposition members had wanted to ask him where the cuts were to be made Mr Goosman said the Government had not interfered with the board. It was only businesslike for Mr Holyoake to write the letter so that it could be placed on record. Mr M. Moohan (Opposition. Petone): The Minister of Works has descended from being the he-man of the outfit to just a message boy taking letters from the Prime Minister to the Roads Board Mr Moohan said the money saved by the board would be used by the Government for other purposes. / Notional Railway Mr S. A. Whitehead (Opoosition. Nelson) said the Mayor of Nelson had reported that the Government would pay the losses of the notional railway from the roads grant for the Nelson district. “It is humbug for the Minister to say that he would not countenance interference with the roads fund,” said Mr Whitehead Mr N E Kirk (Opposition. Lyttelton) asked why Mr Holyoake interfered politically with the Roads Board “The question is how far interference is to go.” Mr Holyoake said that any expenditure deferred would be spent on roads, although not this year. If the board did save, as he had requested, there would be something like £ll4 million deferred "and there will still be more money available this year than last year.”