"SUCH RECKLESSNESS"

Evening Post, Volume CXXVIII, Issue 29, 3 August 1939, Page 7

"SUCH RECKLESSNESS"

FOLLY DEPLORED

EFFECT IN LONDON

"It is a luxury Budget at a most inopportune time when the possibility of default in our financial obligations is staring us in the face. The utter folly of such recklessness must o& obvious to every thinking person,' said the president oi thr Wellington Chamber of Commerce, Captain S. Holm, in a statement yesterday. The total expenditure forecast by the Prime Minister was £62,160,000, of which £16,748,986 was to be raised by loan. Only £2,200,000 of this vast sum was to be spent on defence.

When the terms of renewal of the £17,000,000 loan became known, many in New Zealand felt that the Britisn investors had insisted upon, unduly onerous conditions. The reason now became clear. It appeared obvious that Mr. Nash did not succeed in convincing the financial leaders in Great Britain of the soundness ol his methods, or of the intention of the New Zealand Government to abate the orgy of wild extravagance that had brought the country to its present sorry plight. This must inevitably adversely affect the prospects of renewing "other loans they fell due.

"A study of the Budget figures makes it clear that the Government is determined to continue its role of 'The Prodigal Unrepentant' and it will come as rather a shock to financial circles in Great Britain, from whom Mr. Nash has been imploring financial help, when it is known that, despite our liabilities outside the country, we are determined to spend such vast sums upon ourselves," Captain Holm continued. . "The standard of living of the extravagant debtor is much higher than that of the lender to whom he looks for help; it was ever so. No won. der that when asked to renew the £17,000,000 loan the British investors maintained that if we were determined to flout the advice and to surround ; ourselves with expensive luxury at a time when other nations were denying themselves much and straining every nerve to provide defence for the projection of their people, we should at

least not pursue our folly with the help of their money; and so they asked for it back. , "If we had any sense of responsibility to the Empire or appreciation of the crushing burden that Great Britain is shouldering today in order to ensure our protection from a foreign foe, we would be prepared to economise severely and deny ourselves much that we might be enabled to extend help to Britain in this her period of great trial instead of being an added burden to her."