“UNWORTHY” TACTICS

Evening Star, Issue 22193, 22 November 1935, Page 10

“UNWORTHY” TACTICS

Sflß KISLOP’S PUBLIC ACCOUNTS CHARGES EX-TREASURY CHIEF VOUCHES FOR CORRECTNESS [Per United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, November 22. . Mr A. D. Park, ox-permanent head of the Treasury, in a statement to-day, said that Mr Hislop’s further remarks on the 21st instant on the Public Accounts of the Dominion, while casting grave reflections on the integrity of officers holding responsible public positions, clearly revealed to those with intimate knowledge of national finance that unfair tactics wore being adopted for political propaganda purposes. Mr Hislop’s remark that a balance sheet and an account were the same the world over, illustrated the unfortunate fact that Mr Hislop’s knowledge of public accounts in New Zealand had been sadly neglected. He (Mr Park) could say that the public accounts in New Zealand were more advanced in the direction of commercial accountancy practice than those of almost any other part of the Empire. It was in the process of this development that differences of opinion on technical detail arose between the Audit and the Treasury. The Treasury held the statutory responsibility for the form in which the Public Accounts were presented, while the Audit retained unfettered right of criticism in its reports to _ Parliament. The interpretation which Mr Hislop placed on them and his attempt to make political capital out of them were unworthy of serious reflection.

The Audit Office had made if clear that it in no way raised, nor had it ever raised, any objections to the actual transactions themselves, which were quite legitimate and in accordance with the law. The assertion by Mr Hislop of the manipulating and juggling of the public accounts was a baseless one, and the connecting reference to being “ behind the . bars ” was unworthy of a responsible public man. Mr Park added that his purpose in making the statement arose from the fact that he was a member of the professional bodies of accountants in the Dominion, and that the public accounts in question were issued over his signature as the head of the Treasury. NOTHING SHADY INDEPENDENT’S TESTIMONY [Per United Press Association.] ELTHAM, November 22. At a meeting of electors of Mauga-toki-last night Mr Wilkinson, the independent candidate for Egmont, said, in reference to the controversy over the public accounts: “Behind the statement of Mr Hislop, leader of the Democrat Party,. relative to the AuditorGeneral’s criticism of the public accounts, there is possibly the inference that these accounts have been ‘ cooked,’ As a member of the Public Accounts Committee of. the House, I am in a position to combat that inference. I Can unhesitatingly say that there is nothing, shady in the transactions,, if this, is inferred. There is no question at all about the honesty of the whole business, and it is, regretted that an attempt is made to make political capital out of a matter which.is, capable of a perfectly logical explanation. It is entirely a matter of the form in which the public accounts are kept. The Treasury officials hold one view and the Auditor-General the opposite. For instance, one department has a credit balance of, say, £IOO,OOO, and another department is in debit, and requires a loan of, say, £20,000, which it obtains from the department in credit. The accounts, as presented, then show one department with £IOO,OOO cash, and the borrowing department with £20,000 cash, thus increasing the actual cash balance, by £20,000. The Auditor-General claims, and I think rightly so, that only the actual tangible amount of £IOO,OOO should be' shown as cash, in place of the £120,000, ■ as is the custom at present.

“ There are, of course, other matters complained of by the Auditor-General, but all are capable of satisfactory explanation. There is not the slightest shadow of dishonesty in these transactions, and I make this statement in fairness to the Minister of Finance and the Treasury officials.”