Evening Post. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1907. TIMELY CRITICISM.

Evening Post, Volume LXXIV, Issue 148, 19 December 1907, Page 6

Evening Post. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1907. TIMELY CRITICISM.

As we remarked yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition thoroughly deserved on personal grounds the warm welcome which ho received from his constituents on Tuesday evening. *3Mi\ Massey has always been personally popular, and profoundly as we differ from him on the most important question that came before Parliament lust session, we realise that even with regard to the Land Bills ho did nothing to justify the withdrawal of their confidence by those who had previously believed in him. On the contrary, tho fact that he stuck bravely to his guns against overwhelming odds i is a good reason for an increase of confidence and gratitude on tho part of the men whoso forlorn hope he fought in strict accordance with his repeatedly proclaimed opinions. It is impossible therefore for anybody who knows Mr. Massoy's record to grudge him the compliment which his constituents liavo paid him. When he was not dealing with the land question, it must also be confessed that at Pukekohe as in the House, he had a good deal to say that was interesting and valuable. On the question of a new Parliament House, for instance, lie spoke with a common senso which the Premier has not always displayed in this matter. Mr. Massey estimates that rebuilding and refitting alone will cost £150,000, and lie might have added that not less than £500,000 will bo needed if tho wild schemes to whicji the Premier's lirst -utterance on the subject lent some encouragement were carried out: The Premier's latest suggestion — viz., that the cost, whatever S it may be, should bo defrayed by public S subscription — was not made in time to [be uoticcd by Mr. ALassav, but JJaei-e.

can be little doubt as to what his verdict would have been. The ideal is an excellent one, but as practical men let us sec what the subscriptions amount to before we start building on the strength of them, or assume that the work can be financed without borrowing more than 99 per cent, of the money. Mr. Massoy's first lesson from the fire was that it disclosed "a most serious defect in the financial policy of the Dominion," viz., that there is no insurance on our public buildings. If it is right to insuro private property, he argues, it is also right to insure State property. The enormous quantity of property owned by the State makes, of course, the only essential distinction. Just as the owner of a single vessel would bo very foolish not to insure it, while for a large shipping company tho cost may bo prohibitive, so the State may possibly bo right to run its present risks. But the matter is one for expert enquiry, and deserves more careful consideration than it has yet received. But Mr. Massey's second point was properly dcsciibod: by him as more important, andi it seems to us unanswerable. Why is there no depreciation fund in connection with our public buildings? As Mr. Massey points out, a building is erected, and the cost is paid out of the Public Works Fund, i.e., it k debited to capital account. In ordinary coutso, without the intervention of fire, it becomes dilapidated and unsuitable for its original purpose. Ultimately it is pulled down, and tho cost of putting a new building in its place is ac;ain made a charge upon the Public Works Fund. ''The money 6aved by not having a depreciation fund,'.' Mr. Massey concluded, "might help to swell the annual surplus, but it was not sound finance. If the fire did nothing olse than to call public attention^ to the need for insurance and depreciation funds in connection with our public buildings, it would: not be an unmixed evil." The Leader of the Oprosition has undoubtedly performed a valuable public service by cailing atfcent;on to these points, and wo hope that his _ criticism may be the means of inducing the Government to conduct a stilly wider enquiry into tho whole administration of tho Public Works Fund. In spite of his flighty references last week to the Parliament ilouse which we should at once set about building "for all time " on the site where Government Houso now stands, Sir Joseph WaTd has shown on tho whole that ho pos6esses a much more sensitive financial conscience than many of his critics gave him credit for. Here and there in his last two Budgets, and notably by his abandonment of the Seddonian process of "collaring" the Sinking Funds, and his determination to charge repairs to the Consolidated Fund, he has displayed unmistakable traces of a desire for sounder methods, and wo hope that last week's disaster may, as Mr. Massey suggests, be the means of carrying him much further along this road. Salaries, compasoionate allowances, field-guns, stamps, and telegrams are amonc; tho itoms still charged to the Public Works Fund and for a valuable analysis of this illegitimate expenditure, which possibly he had not time to study during the rush of tho session', we may refer the Premier to the article contributed by "Nemesis" to our issue of the 15th ult. The rosult of our contributor's examination was to show_ that Tather more .than half of tho Public Works expenditure for tho current year is being illegitimately charged in this way to capital account. If the Government is sincere in its professed preference for business methods, will it submit the whole matter to a committee of accountants of high standing, and abide by the result?