WAR EXPENSES

Evening Post, Volume CXXXV, Issue 136, 10 June 1943, Page 3

WAR EXPENSES

CONTROL QUESTION

MINISTER IN CHARGE

Control over war expenditure was the subject of an urgent question asked ■in the House of Representatives yesjterday by Mr. J. A. Lee, on behalf of 'the member for Napier (Mr. W.E. Barnard), who wished to know, in view of the fact that war expenditure now ! accounted for approximately threequarters of the Dominion's total expenditure, and was not subject to examination by the House, whether the Prime Minister would set up a Select Committee to examine and report to the House on all proposed outlay for the War Expenses Account. It was stated by the questioner that ,the duty of oversight over war expenditure was formerly the responsibility .of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Holland) when a member of the War [Administration, but that since his retirement from that position no person ihad been appointed to carry.put that .'duty. The question also mentioned [the practice of the House of Commons, which had set up a special committee of 32 members to examine and report on war expenditure. ■ The Prime Minister (Mr. Fraser) answered the question immediately, and suggested that when statements were mAde in that way the questioner should first satisfy himself regarding their accuracy. It was incorrect to say that nobody had been appointed by War Cabinet to examine war expenditure.- That wasi the responsibility of the Hon. A. Hamilton. i Mr. Speaker: Thatas news to the . The *Prime Minister' replied that the !member who put the question could have found that out quite; well; at was 'common knowledge, having been repeatedly mentioned. .The most important part of the question related to the special committee, .and on the previous evening he had indicated that he would be pleased to submit the details of war expenditure*to the Public Accounts Committee. This was a representative body, but if there were any reasons for setting up a special committee they could be considered. Of course he knew the member did not suggest that a committee of 32 should be appointed. That would be like the appointment of another House 'of Representatives.