The Grey River Argus FRIDAY, August 7th, 1936. BOROUGH BUDGET.

Grey River Argus, 7 August 1936, Page 4

The Grey River Argus FRIDAY, August 7th, 1936. BOROUGH BUDGET.

Vaiied views were voiced when the Borough Council passed its estimates of £46,898 last evening. The public are less familiar with the details, but are quite able to appreciate the general principles on which different standpoints were taken. The first consideration is whether the plan of voiks could Or should be cut tailed. Some Councillors thought _ so when they proposed cutting down the estimates, and this by more than the extent to which they exceed those of last year, some £2,000. It is probable that ratepayers in the main would piefer the works programme to be fully carried out. The expansion of the town is not to be ignored, nor its necessities. It may be objected that things ar e apt to be done piecemeal. The remedy is to have a definite (programme, and to stick to it. If members desiring to cut down spending were to indicate the works thej would omit, it would help. A c a ll simply for £3,000 of a reduction is at this stage questionable. The Hospital levy, reduced as it is is calculated on an increased borough rateable capital value to the extent of nearly £25,000 over the previous ye a r. Works done, therefore, have made for a sub stantial increase in the value of town property and amenites, and ot ability to bear rating. certainly is outstanding £lO,OOO in revenue, half of which is recoverable; yet, in view of all the facts, including the necessity of th e works, it appears as if the best course meantime is that adopted by the Council. A loan might be justified were. the programme a more ambitious one. There is no denying the urgency of drainage and street extensions and improvements. Sub-division of areas hitherto lying almost, idle increases the rateable capacity, and makes conditions better generally for the community. The Council has not raisel the question as to whether it gets the best value for its outlay, though some members do suggest this query when they refer to irregular undertakings being decided upon after drawing up a programme. This point is suggested also by consideration of the fact that for years p a st the State has been a contributor in

the form of relief of unemployment. Incidentally the Council ■ is not at fault in voting £l,BOO in this connection, for the ill-wind of unemployment has blown good in its particular direction. There is no gainsaying the utility of planning to meet th e needs of growth. At the same time economy is essential. Wise spending would avert any undue rat- I ing increase. Thus loans b e sanctioned only when they cannot be avoided. It is prudent to endeavour to avoid borrowing, and to live upon income as far as it possibly can be done, but it is not so to adopt a course which could curtail income. What justifies borrowing is the prospect of increased resources. An overdraft, however, is comparatively costly. In the present instance. the margins one way or another are not such as 10 occasion anxiety. The point is rather that of, the tendency. To say people must pay for amenities is not to say they should pay too dearly. The Council may Liable to keep so much within its estimates as to ensure later a reversal of the tendency of rates to rise. That is a worthy goal. Essential work done without waste should make for it. A fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work is not waste. It pays in the long run. All things considered, the Council appears warranted in its endeavour to meet all needs for the time being out of revenue. If . the town continues to extend, there will be justification for considering the advantages of a loan.