Untitled

Otago Daily Times, Issue 16238, 23 November 1914, Page 4

Against the administration toy Mr Fraser of the Public Works Department has been directed by the Leader of the Opposition one of the most flimsy and foolish, charges upon which the anti-Reform Party v is relying in the election contest. It is that the expenditure upon public buildings has increased during the past two years. Mr Fraser does not deny the charge, but he justly claims thai the charge should not be made without an explanation of the nature of the expenditure that is being incurred and of the circumstances under which it was undertaken. He points out that the principal items of expenditure upon public buildings that are charged against the present Government have reference to works which were actually commenced iby the party that is now in opposition. The largest contract for public buildings that is now being executed is that for the erection of the Parliament Buildings in Wellington. Tha electors do hot need to be told that tho anti-Reform Party, when in office, did not consider it necessary to insure public buildings against the risk of fire. It 3 policy was to borrow for the construction of buildings, and then, if the buildings should be destroyed by fiTe, to borrow once more in order to replace them. Tho present Government has instituted the practice of laying aside £10,030 a year out of revenue as an insurance fund so that the unsound policy of the past may be abandoned. The Government buildings at Wellington having been destroyed, however, it became necessary to restore them. The expenditure in this woTk alone is estimated at £250,000. By the accident of circumstances it has devolved upon the Reform Government to provide the funds. But any person who is curious to know when the work was commenced may learn by an inspection of a corner-stone of the buildings that are now in course of erection that the construction was started by the Ward Government, for he may read an inscription showing that I the foundation stone was laid on a certain date in March, 1912, and giving the names of Ministers who were then ?n office. This inscription will not, however, tell liini the whole story, which is that, the Ward Government being about to vacate office in faivour of a reconstructed Ministry that was headed by Mr Mackenzie, the performance of tlu ceremony of laying the foundation stone was hurried on so that it might be on? of the acts of the moribund Cabinet. So overwhelming, indeed, was the desire of the Ward Government to be associated with the beginning of this work that— according to a story that obtained currency at the time—the difficulty of securing a suitable corner-stone by the date

appointed for tho ceremony was eventually overcome by the use of a gravestone, upon tho reverse side of which was placed the names of the Ministers of the day ! This is only one item among several which illustrate the injustice of the allegation that the Government has increased the expenditure upon public buildings, but tho magnitude of the figures that are involved in it makes it the most striking. Mr Fraser spoke very temperately at Clyde iast week, as he always does, in defence of his administration in this Tespect. He might fairly have been excused if he had criticised in strong temis the political effrontery of those who attack him for incurring the necessary expenditure upon works to the prosecution of which they had themselves committed him. What must appeal to electors of impartial minds in connection with the party controversy over a matter like this is that the reasonableness or unreasonableness of a charge is not to be determined by the mere citation of figures. The -whole of the circumstances surrounding the expenditure of public money must be considered in order that a correct judgment upon the expenditure itself may be arrived at. The complaint, for instance, that the public expenditure under the present Government has grown—as, in fact, it grows inevitably, year by year, under any Govern ment—loses its force when it is known that the expansion is largely accounted for by the automatic increase of salaries under classification schemes, introduced by a preceding Government, and by fresh increases of salaries, of which the Opposition approved, to public servants such as teachers, railwaymen, and policemen. Similarly, the complaint that the amount that is raised by taxation has increased under the regime of the present Government is entirely misleading. Mr Fraser has disposed of this charge by showing that to whatever extent the revenue from taxation has increased during the past Parliament there has been no incTeaee in the indirect taxation which is provided by the community as a whole. The additional taxation is provided entirely by the payers of income tax and land tax. Mr Fraser claims, indeed, that the Government has made certain remissions in Customs duties. With the exception, however, of the duty on casings, these remissions are the Tesult of departmental interpretations of the tariff, and we' are unable to agree that they are legitimately to be regarded as concessions for which the Government may take the credit. Mt Fiaser's speech at Clyde was, however, generally a convincing rebuttal of charges that haive been made by the Opposition against the Government of which he i» a respected member.