"THE ROCK OF FINANCE"

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 82, 3 October 1931, Page 12

"THE ROCK OF FINANCE"

Parliament will meet again on Tuesday to learn the Government's financial proposals. Here it was the examination of the financial position by an Inter-Party Committee that led to the formation of a Coalition Government to deal with the crisis. In Great Britain'it was the report of the May Economy Committee that compelled the political parties to realise the urgent necessity of united action. The Majority Report of the May Committee contains many features of interest to New Zealand—its emphasis upon the manner in! which burdens are being laid on the backs of posterity, its proposal to save £13,600,000 on the Education Vote (which may be noted by our own "Hands off Education" advocates who would point to Britain). But the most interesting and pointed comment is that bearing on the process by which expenditure is increased. The report refers to political developments which have resulted in members of Parliament and Governments being elected pledged in advance to vast and expensive schemes, and states: Tho electoral programme of each succossivo party in power, particularly whore it w^s formerly in Opposition, has usually been prepared with more regard to attracting electoral support than to a careful balancing of national intorests. When the timo comes to put that pi'ogrammo into force, matters which had formerly appoared easy and attractive aro found to involve such grave questions as whether the proposals aro. administratively possible, whether they -will have the desired results, whether tho country can bear the1 cost, whether, in' short, they are roally in the national interest. It is almost inevitable that a now Cabinet should find itself driven to the conclusion that many of its promised reforms ought not to proceed, but it has a difficult course to steer before it can periuade its supporters in the House to recognise this in view of their pledges ,80 freely given to the Electorate. The problem is a serious one,.and it is hardly for us to suggest a solution; yet a solution has to be found if democracies not to suffer shipwreck on the hard rock of finance. One member signing the Majority Report dissented from this statement, that his grounds of dissent were interpreted by "The Times" as meaning that "politicians arc not so much knaves as fools who do not understand the financial consequences of what they propose." But whether one adopts the harsher or milder explanation (if it is milder) there can be little gainsaying the main fact— that politicians promise rashly more than they can safely perform. Thus they are driven ultimately to choose between breach of pledges or fulfilment which they perceive to be ruinous. The May Report, though stating "it is hardly for us to suggest a solution," does submit some suggestions, for strengthening the lone hand of the Chancellor —too often the Ishmael of the House with his hand against every man and every man's hand against him—and informing Parliament more ifully and frequently of the present and prospec* tive financial position. But it adds that "fho best devised machinery of

financial control will be of little avail if the will to control be absent." That is the lesson which we in New Zealand must learn and learn quickly. There must be the will to keep expenditure within bounds. Control must be practised in the first place by the Government and supported by Parliament. Yet the responsibility does not end there. Democracy for its own salvation must accept its share of the responsibility, refuse to be deluded with impossible programmes, and give support to Governments which are ready lo place their promises under the financial test...