The Sun 42 WYNDHAM STREET AUCKLAND FRIDAY, MAY 30, 1930 A DARK PICTURE OF FINANCE

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 985, 30 May 1930, Page 10

The Sun 42 WYNDHAM STREET AUCKLAND FRIDAY, MAY 30, 1930 A DARK PICTURE OF FINANCE

TIIEItE is almost a Celtic melancholy in the first statement issued. I l>y the Hon. G. W. Forbes as Minister of Finance. The new Prime Minister has painted a dark picture of national finance and set it in a frame of crepe. In the foreground, black as night, he has. placed the sombre figures of depression, a record deficit, declining revenue, increased taxation, and the grim necessity for rigorous State and private economy. bie canvas is vastly different from the radiant productions of the United Government when, in the flush of bounding optimism its artistic policy was to “paint the clouds with sunshine.” With the exception of the readers of this column who, for eighteen months past have been urged not to hug the delusion that the present Government has for every ill a magical remedy, and also to realise that a day of reckoning would come soon, Mr. k orbes s dyed-in-black picture of financial difficulties will doubtless be a shock to a complacent 'community. jßeyond question the position is not good, but there is no cause yet for nervous piostration and misery. The Prime Minister has accepted the darkest pigments from his departmental advisers and has laid them on too thickly for a special purpose. It need not be pretended that the Prime Minister, within forty-eight hours after his appointment, already has mastered the subject of national finance. “The hand is the hand of Esau, but the voice is the voice of Jacob.”

And it might be said that the departmental Jacob has wept rather. copiously. Of course, it is a shrewd beginning for an administrator, not only faced with the embarrassment of strained finances, but certain to be harassed by a less sympathetic Opposition quite able, if willing, to drive the weakened Government into the wilderness. Moreover, the Prime Minister’s sobriquet among his numerous friends is “Honest George.” Let him be praised for his honesty and courage; -still, it is not necessary to applaud him too heartily for its exaggerated gloom for party purposes. There is political wisdom in the tactics of an embarrassed leader who says at the outset of his career: “We are in Queer Street: what will do to lead us out on to an open thoroughfare?” That, in short, is precisely what Mr. Forbes has said to the country, and even a hostile Opposition, representing an overwhelming majority in Parliament, will hesitate to refuse, guidance and assistance to a bewildered and disillusioned administration.

First of all, it should be understood clearly that, as yet, there is not a deficit of & 3,000,000. It is a fearsome spectre brought into prominence in order to justify still another stupid increase in taxation. Why not make a practical, determined effort to lay the ghost instead of smiting harder the overburdened taxpayer? There will be a prodigious deficit this financial'year only if the Government, Parliament, and the spendthrift departments of State continue their folly in extravagant expenditure, and •attempts at curing economic and industrial diseases with overdoses of quack political medicines. Mr. Forbes is being praised and is entitled to praise for his initial courage in bursting the balloon of political optimism and expensive expediency. There is ample scope left for the development and practice of that courage. The railways, for example, arc running at express speed toward ruin. Could anyone save them from a disastrous smash so long as any group or successive groups of politicians insist upon maintaining branch lines and other vote-catching services at a tremendous loss? And what kind of sense is there in the Prime Minister’s proposal to appoint another money-wast-ing commission of inquiry and that overworked word “co-ordina-tion”'? A record salary is being paid to the general manager who knows quite well why the railways cannot be run at a profit. Will the politicians allow him to stop the worst losses by the. simple and obvious process of compelling farmers to pay freight on the same scale as other users of the service?

“It must he recognised that wejiave to cut our coat according to our cloth,” declares Honest George Forbes. Precisely; but may the country depend on the Government and Parliament to start first, with sharp scissors, on cutting their own extravagant coats according to their cloth? Time and circumstances will compel the public to practise economy, and lessen the pleasures of thrift. Everybody knows exactly the luxuries which may and should be curtailed. The carnival of easy spending must come to an end. Let a foolish Legislature set the best example.

SOCIAL MENACES

'f’W ICE within the span of a fortnight judges of the Supreme

Court have deemed it necessary to call public attention to conditions which are a menace to the well-being of women and children. In the first instance parents throughout New Zealand were taken to task by Mr. Justice Smith, who dealt stringently with the dangers to which young girls are exposed when allowed to attend dances haphazard and unescorted. The second warning has particular reference to Auckland. Speaking in the Supreme Court yesterday Mr. Justice Herdman referred bluntly to the lack of supervision in parks, especially the Domain, and quoted unpleasant cases that had come under his notice. The peril referred to by Mr. Justice Smith can be averted largely by parents themselves in keeping a wiser and firmer guiding hand on the personal affairs of their children, hut it is equally the clear duty of the. State as represented by the Justice and Police Departments to rid the community of its dangerous elements. Therefore the remarks of the two judges may be considered jointly as a plain instruction to both publie and police—a warning that a greater degree of both caution and protection must be exercised.

To its lasting credit Auckland is magnificently endowed with, parks and recreation areas, but unfortunately it is necessary to face the fact that these pleasant places attract and afford concealment for loafing undesirables. This problem is not peculiar to Auckland or to any other city in New Zealand or elsewhere, but that is no reason why it should be accepted with a shrug’ of resignation. Every Auckland park, and particularly the Domain, is visited regularly by unescorted women and children, and every ratepayer—every citizen—has a right to expect and demand that these places set aside for the benefit of his family and of future generations shall be kept clean and safe. Moreover, he has a right to expect that the police, as his appointed guardians, will respond adequately to this call for protection. The remarks of Mr. Justice Herdman are timely, for his personal knowledge of the dangers existing in public parks is shared by others. In arranging to provide increased supervision (for, to the credit of the authorities, it must be said that portions of the Domain are patrolled at certain hours) the Police Department would be well advised to discuss the position with the City Council, which also has a duty in the matter, and arrange, possibly, for co-operative control. Lastly the publie and police are entitled to the full and rigorous support of the courts. In recent years a pious horror of that efficient deterrent to sexual viciousness—the lash—lias been manifest. One cannot help but wonder if a return to this drastic punishment would not have the effect of removing some of the existing difngers.