THE PUBLIC REVENUES ACT

Otago Witness, Issue 2667, 26 April 1905, Page 15

THE PUBLIC REVENUES ACT

of 1900? He did not suppose they had, because they had been unfortunate enough to be represented by Government supporters who did not tell them about these things. But that was a matter the Opposition proposed to remedy in the future. This act, then, provided three things. Firstly, that, in the case of money being voted by Parliament for any particular work in any particular part of the colony, the Minister of Public Works could take that money and spend it in any other part of the colony, so long as it was on work of the same class. Secondly, the act provided that in the case of any dispute between the Treasurer and the Auditor ~ and Controller-general this should be referred to Parliament. But the Treasurer was in office because he had a majority behind him, and that majority, which supported hini and kept him in the House, would support him in any such dispute. Thus much of the power that should belong to the man who practically controlled the finances of the colony, the Auditor and Controller-general, was taken away. The third provision was the most objectionable of the three. Many of the salaries, such as those of members, Ministers, judges, and higher officials, were fixed (as they knew) by act of Parliament, and they were not supposed to be altered without amendment of the act; but this provision provided that the salaries of any of these people could be increased not by amendment of the act, but by vote of th<> House of Representatives, taken, perhaps, at 3 o'clock in the morning, when two-thirds of the members were asleep and" the other third ought to be.— (Laughter.) That section was placed on the Statute Book in order to make it possible for the Government to pay £40 a year more to every member of the House in addition^to his salary. — (A Voice : " Quite right.") It might have been the right thing, but it was very improperly done. If it was right to increase the salaries of members of the House, this should have been done in the ordinary way by having an amending bill introduced and laid before Parliament, and placed on the Statute Book. That section was in operation now, and there was nothing- to prevent members, if they felt inclined, making that £40 as much as £140. They had been challenged to name an act they would dare to repeal, and he said they would repeal that act as soon as he (Mr Massey) saw the majority of the House 'in favour of repealing it. It was going to be repealed, and the proper power and authority was going to be given to the Auditor and Controller-general.