AUCKLAND FINANCIAL REFORM ASSOCIATION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9096, 3 July 1888, Page 6

AUCKLAND FINANCIAL REFORM ASSOCIATION.

A REPLY TO THE PREMIER.

The committee of the Auckland Financial Reform Association held a meeting yesterday morning, to consider the Premier's statements in the House on Friday night last, respecting the report drawn up by that body. It will be recollected that Sir Harry Atkinson, in moving that the House go into Committee of Supply to consider the Estimates, mentioned the Association's report as bristling with misstatements. Mr. E. W. Burton produced the draft copy of a letter in reply to the Premier, and considerable discussion took place when thv* letter, which is as follows, was adopted:—

To Sir Harry A. Atkinson, E.C.M.G., Premier 'New Zealand, Wellington. Auckland, July 2,1888. Dear Sir Harry,—You are reported by the correspondents of the Auckland newspapers to have said in the House, on Friday, Vstb ultimo, upon your motion to go into Committee of Supply to consider the Estimates : — The Auckland Financial Reform Association had sent a report upon the Colonial Treasurer's proposal for increased taxation. All their statements about pensions were absolutely erroneous, and so were also, most of the other paragraphs. For instance, they considered that there was room for a general decrease of expenditure by £150,000 tor this year. By comparison of the cost of governing in 1860 with the growth of population in making their calculation, they quite overlooked the fact that there were now many charges which were formerly nonexistent, or borne by Provincial Governments. Still, it would surprise those gentlemen to learn that while they asked a reduction of the cost of government to £850,000(we presume a mistake of the newspaper correspondents, as the words used by the Association are ' by £150,000,' the other figures being nowhere found in the Association's report), the actual cost was only £704,000, even before the retrenchment of the late and present Government was carried out." (See New Zealand Herald and Evening Star, 30th June). The Association, while thanking you for the interest taken in their work, cannot but regret that, except in one instance, your criticism was too general to be of value to them, and that in that one instance in which you proceed to particulars you fall into such grievous error as to destroy the weight of your own strictures. As to the expression, " All their statements about pensions were positively erroneous," if it may be translated freely that the Government abandon any intended extension of the pension system, the Association may congratulate the country upon the doom of a scheme so radically vicious and economically unsound. It is a ourrent article of faith that literary reviewers often criticise books which they have never read, but the Association cannot read your criticism—"that, while they asked for a reduction of £150,000, the actual cost of government was only £704,000, even before the retrenchment of the late and present Government "—without placing you in the same category ; they would indeed be slow to imagine that you had been disingenuous. It is a matter for regret that neither the particular paragraph of the report referred to by you, nor Mr. Barron's return of the 19th May, 1887, therein mentioned, should have been studied before making to the House the inaccurate statement complained of. The total cost of government for the year 1886-7 set forth in this celebrated return was £2,144,654. The departments non-existent in 1860 are expressly stated in the Association's report to be eliminated from the comparison. These departments, according to the same historical document are: — Education, £371,603; public works, with mines included, £750,639 (mines, £32,693; public works, £723,946); representing a total deduction of £1.128,242. The elimination of this last sum leaves exactly £1,016,412, as stated in the Association's report. These figures are absolutely correct, and sustain the position that the cost of the machinery of government under the uneliminated heads multiplied tenfold in 27 years, whilst the population only increased seven and a-quarter times. The Association is astonished to find that, with Mr. Barron's return and your own estimates for the present year before you, you should have assumed the sum of £704,242, representing the expenditure of the departments of the Colonial Secretary, Colonial Treasury, Justice, Post and Telegraphs, Customs and Marine, Stamps &nd Deeds, Native Affairs, Lands, Public Buildings, and Domains, to be the whole cost of government outside Education, Public Works, and Mines. All the other items of the return introduced into the comparison are, forgotten. : These items corrected to date by the aid of the present Estimates, and not forgetting the clumsy method ,of successive Governments in withdrawing \certain charges from the public gaze by that Elegant euphemism "Under Special Acts of the Legislature," are :— : r " •

1. The GoVernor and establishment £7,500 2. Ministers ... 6,600 3. The Legislature 36,405 4. Defence 158,666 5. Controller and Auditor-General ttnd Assistant 1,800 6. Pensions, Compensations, and Gratuities under the Civil Service Act, 1866 25,000 7. For Native purposes ... ... 7,000 Total £242,971 Thus the present cost of government, exclusive of education, public works, and mines, is £947,213, greatly marring the sweet dream of the electors about an alleged retrenchment of £233,000. There is consequently still room for a reduction of £221,213, in order to arrive at the minimum of £726,000 demanded by the Association.

Even granting that this reduction be obtained, the colony will still enjoy the unenviable notoriety of being the most overgoverned country in the world ; a notoriety attained during the last 17 years, for the greater part of which time you have had the honour of being one of the Crown's chief advisers.

The sum of £704,000, erroneously assumed by you to be the whole cost of governing this colony, is even, if it had been fortunately true, according to a recently-compiled comparative return of the Association, 3s 3d per head in excess of the relative State expenditure of Sweden with its fleet, army, and public works included. The Association having placed the matter before you, rely upon your courtesy to correct the wrong impression left upon the members of the House.

. Referring to the statement that the Association " quite overlooked the fact that there were now many charges which were formerly non-existent, or borne by the Provincial Governments," the committee of this Association have for some time past been collecting data upon this and other subjects, but we are directed meantime to express the opinion that, so far as the examination has proceeded, the explanation suggested by you is insufficient to account for the vast increase in our national expenditure. At the same time, the Association agrees with, you that Centralisation has induced the addition of many charges which were formerly non-existent. Signed by request and on behalf oi the com-'-littee.

John M. McLachlan, Chairman. R. J. Duncan, Secretary. It was decided that a copy of this letter be forwarded to Sir Harry Atkinson and to all the Auckland members.