LOSS ON ADVANCES

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2523, 31 July 1915, Page 15

LOSS ON ADVANCES

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE. A question, ivhioh developed into a series of questions) asked by tlio Leader of tho Opposition in tho House of Bepresentatives on Wednesday about tho working of the State Advances Department. Sir Joseph Ward said it appeared to him from the report of tlie Department that the profits of the Advances to Settlors' Branch was, about £24,000-less than for last year, and that.-the profits; in the loans to local ho'difcs wero be-' tweea £13,000 and £14,000 less.. Mr. Allen: No profit at all. Sir Joseph Ward: I am saying that the cost has been between £13,000 and £14,000 more than last -.year. I .can't make out tho reason'for it. There must be a reason. Tho honourable gentleman must know the reason, and I am rather anxious to know how that is accounted for. The Hon.' J. 'Allen: The profits for this year wero £68,512, the cost of management was £10,621, showing a not profit of £57,424, of which the sum of £31,000 has been applied to the writing down of loan charges. With regard to advances to local authorities, instead of there being a profit there has been a net loss of £8958. Sir Joseph Ward: Why is it more than last, year? Mr. Allen: Partly because we are paying more for our money/ and ■ the profits are bound to be less if wo are to pay more for our money. Sir Joseph Ward: But you only lont £220,0001 Mr. Allen: The honourable gentleman ■must remember that these losses aro accruing to us on account of loans made two or threo years a<*o. Sir Joseph Ward insisted that this was'not the right explanation. The loss last year had been £14,000, the year before it was £7000, and the year before it. was less than £700.

Mr. Mien said'that it must be remembered tliat tho total amount invested in- tlie Advances Department was about two millions.. The £220,000 advanced last year was a mere fleabite, scarcely affecting the annual loss. 'Sir Josepli Ward contended that tlie Minister's explanation was no answer to his ouestion.

The Hon. J. Alleii in further reply read a sentence from the Departmental report that the losses wero "due to tlie' uiirerrfunerative rate of interest at which earlier loans wero granted."