NOTES OF THE DAY

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 15, 12 October 1932, Page 8

NOTES OF THE DAY

It is satisfactory to note that the administration of the Native Department is to he overhauled. The National Expenditure Commission devoted a good deal of attention to this department and recommended that its expenditure should be more closely controlled. If members of Parliament have been vigilant, they themselves will have gathered from the Budget that on the bare figures there is a case for scrutiny in this direction. Last financial year, when every other department was being cut to the bone, the Native Depaitment s expenditure nearly doubled. It rose from £35,720 in 1930-31 to £65,709 last financial year. There may be a good explanation but Parliament should satisfy itself that such is the case. J * * ♦ *

Not much time is to be lost by the Government in circulating the legislation dealing with the State superannuation funds. The Prime Minister hopes to introduce the amendments this week and refer them to a Select Committee. That should give the Public Service organisations affected an opportunity of acquainting themselves with the proposals, of stating their points of view, and making any suggestions they may think necessary. And since their members have large investments in the various funds, it is right and proper that they should be heard and ample time given for the appreciation of their case. No doubt this is already in course of preparation on the strength of Mr. Forbes’s earlier announcement that the amending legislation would closely follow the recommendations of the National Expenditure Commission. Even so Public Service organisations should be given a reasonable opportunity to study the actual text of the Government’s proposals, an opportunity that ought to be secured by the early introduction of the Bill.

Mr. A. E. Ansell’s contribution to the Budget debate yesterday indicates an inclination on the part of some members of Parliament to engage in the exercise of a little self-examination. Referring to the criticism that had been levelled at the members of the* National Expenditure Commission, he remarked that while it was the duty of Parliament to criticise the report, it was not its duty to make personal attacks on the members of the Commission. This point of view does not seem to be appreciated by some members, but it is certainly in accord with the best Parliamentary traditions. As Sir James Parr, an experienced Parliamentarian, and previously head of an important spending depart-/ ment, remarked in the Legislative Council on Friday last, no Royal Commission in his time has shown higher public spirit or performed more meritorious public service. ‘‘Their report,” he said, “is a sorry tale of waste and inefficiency and, in the main, I believe it to be true. We are all to blame for it.” It is only in this spirit that Parliament may rehabilitate itself in public opinion. The Commission’s report, m Sir James well said, will be the acid test. of Parliament’s sincerity.