EXPENDITURE CUTS

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 80, 5 April 1933, Page 8

EXPENDITURE CUTS

WHAT HAS BEEN DONE REPLY TO CRITICISM EFFECT OP ECONOMIES

* Replying to recent criticism of ■ the policy and administration of . the Government, the : Hon. E. ■ Masters (Minister of Education), ■ speaking at the annual meeting of the Wellington Chamber of Commerce last evening, gave figures • showing what economies had already been effected. When demands were made for further largo economies", it should be remembered, he said, what had been accomplished. Mr. Masters spoke after the Prime Minister, who in the course of his speech said he frankly. realised that, in view of the reduction in the national income, further economies were necessary* Mr. Masters. said t ,that the estimated expenditure for 1932-33 was £22,507,000. ' Out of that they had debt funds to meet amounting to no less than £10,012,000. Then there was the exchange rate at 10 per cent., £350,000. ■ In- addition to that, there was the transfer of motor taxation to the Treasury; of £1,110,000, and permanent charges 'of £473,000—a • total of £11,945,000. Thbse charges were really irreducible. ■ Out of the balance of £10,562,000, there was a sum of £6,870,000 for social services; defence, £637,000; law and order, £688,000; assistance to industries, primary and secondary £897,000; leaving a sum of £1,476,000. Dealing with'tho" cost of social services, £6,870,000, Mr. Masters said that the cost of education was £2,700,000; pensions, £5,140,000; and health, and I hospitals, £1,300,000. As the result of j economies, ■ the Education Vote had been reduced by £1,200,000. . The; capital expenditure was reduced from £500,000 to £100,000. The reduction in the Pensions Vote was made with great reluctance. It was only undertaken as a duty. The reduction amounted to no less than £300,000.: . DEFENCE EXPENDITURE. In 1929 the Defence Vote was £1,120,000, and the expenditure in 1932 was reduced to £627,000. The Minister asked if they would be justified in going any lower in ihe defence expenditure of this country. There were some people who said that defence expenditure should be abolished. The National Economy; Commission recommended that the naval expenditure should be reduced by another £200,000. That would mean placing increased responsibility on the Mother Country. The speaker maintained that it was our" duty to pay our fair share to--1 wards the defence of our own i country, and he was of opinion that :. it would be, difficult to reduce that ' vote further. As-to the cost of law and order, £688,000, Mr. Masters asked, if it would be wise to make further economies under this head. ( We had^ for its sizej probably one of the best police forces in the world. If there was ever a'time when a strong police force was necessary it was the present time. MUCH ALREADY DONE. There. was ■ a balance left' of £1,476,000, continued .Mr. Masters. How was the Government going to make the further great economies it had been asked to make, and which it had been eriticise'd for not making? It could not make such economies without reducing the services of the country. He did not think, the making of economies should cease, but it should be remembered that the Government had been effecting economies up to the present time. In regard to further demands for larger economies, it- must not be forgotten that every service that was discontinued meant more unemployment. Eeference was then made to the large reduction which had already been made in capital expenditure, particularly on public works. ' . . ■• Mr. Masters concluded by saying that there was no, one more anxious than the Prime Minister to effect economies, consistent with efficiency..