THE PROBLEMS OF ECONOMY

Dominion, Volume 15, Issue 235, 30 June 1922, Page 6

THE PROBLEMS OF ECONOMY

To The Editor. Sir, —i n y O ur leading article yesterday, you ask, “What the Welfare League means when it says the Government is right to practice economies, and wrong to cut off gny part of the increased salaries which have helped, to make economy necessary? Is the league like some of the politician/i shirking an unpleasant issue? No, Sir, tho league is not shirking an unpleasant issue, nor did we say that it was wrong to cut off any part of tho increased salaries. On. again reading our contribution on this subject we admit that, through a desire to save space, we did not express ourselves as clearly as we have on previous occasions when discussing the salary ‘‘cut.”. Our view, and we believe .a majority of people think the sane, .is that an indiscriminate out in salaries on a percentage basis is bound to operate unfairly, especially when annual increases of salaries are allowed to continue, and in some cases more than balance the percentage “cut.” This policy of “cut” is,, we maintain, in any case a “makeshift,” because the malady of extravagance goes much deeper. There is no r question that before Public Service expenditure is brought back to n reasonable figure, there must be a revision of salaries, but such a revision should be on a sound basis, and even then it is only a partial remedy. We believe that tho main economy is to be effected m reorganisation of the business of Government. There is a strong feeling abroad that close expert investigation should be made into the commercial value of the business methods 6f the departments of State, the losses through duplication of operations, hampering routine, and absence of initiative: there is also a feeling that the Public Service is overstaffed. Many instances can be quoted of, stupid red-tape methods losing the departments -in the aggregate considerable sums of' money, we see far too frequently cases of serious embezzlement of “public funds by public servants, the investigation m some cases shows that these defalcations extend over many years—and show also that a very lax system obtains which would not be allowed for one moment in a private business. Without pressing the point we repeat that the only way to remedyS»hese matters, including staffing and re-adjustment of salanes in an equitable 'manner, is by outside expert investigation. We advance this proposal without hesitation, because we believe that suqh a committee would gladly give their services gratuitously. Alay we quote your own opinion, as expressed in your leading article of the January 17 last, when commenting favourably on a contribution by tho Welfare League on the salary cut, you said: “It is self evident that if the service had been better and more efficiently organised there would have been less over-growth to top away in these days of enforced economy.” . . . “The Hunt Commission laid it down as an axiom that true efficiency always means economy, and without true efficiency , there can be no economy. The appointment of a committee of competent business men offers a most obvious ineaus of securing this double benefit.” Jnst one more word as to ycur leader of yesterday, in which you quote increase of wages in the Railway Department alone, as £910,000 more in 1921 than in 1920—may we add that coal cost them considerably more also —eventif’ you give tho Railways every benefit of these increase?,, does it justify tho position in 1921-22? For the year ending Afarch 31, 1922, wages did not rise, and coal certainly could not have increased materially, yet the expenditure • went up from 81.-59 per cent, to 93.89 per cent, of the revenue. Is none of this increase duo to want of sound business metheds, and has not every business hi the Dominion had to face similar difficulties? The private business had to re-organise, but our public, utilities instead of doing so. merely raised prices and cut services.—l am, etc., N.Z. WELFARE LEAGUE. Wellington, Juno 29, 1922.