The Sun TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 1920. SHORT-SIGHTED ECONOMY.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume VII, Issue 2030, 17 August 1920, Page 6

The Sun TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 1920. SHORT-SIGHTED ECONOMY.

In the first instance, the City Council's grant to the Progress League was t'3oo. This year the grant has been reduced by half. Moreover, one other local body, at least, no doubt influenced by the example set by the City Council, has substantially reduced its contribution. A deputation from the Progress League waited upon the council last evening and asked that the original vote be- reinstated. A majority of councillors decided that £l5O was as much as could be afforded. And the policy of the City Council and the .two county councils may tend to bring about a general reduction in outside subsidies to the league. We hope for the league's sake that the virus of false economy will not become epidemic. It should he unnecessary at this stage to detail the useful, and, at times, really valuable work which this body of enthusiasts lias performed on behalf of Canterbury. As the chairman points out, the league's efforts in connection with Lyttelton railway facilities and the hydro-electric scheme at Lake Coleridge are worth to the city much more than the council's grant. In other and wider matters, too, the league has amply justified its existence, and can fairly be regarded as the mouthpiece of the province. On provincial questions it has spoken clearly and boldly, and has come to be recognised as a genuine force in Canterbury affairs. If an organisation of the potentialities suggested is not worth reasonable financial support, what is? The truth is that the council could have reinstated the i'3so per annum grant without hurting itself. The league, it will be admitted by non-partisans, has more than earned its keep, and it is shortsightedness to the verge of blindness to do anything that will threaten to interfere with its logical development. We know that the City Council is hard up and has been compelled to practise the strictest economy. But experience lias shown-that the grants to the Progress League are moneys well spent. The league is a first-class investment; directly or indirectly its returns are sure and worth while. To councillors who are pure materialists on matters of this sort, even >:l. r )0 is 100 much. They would leave the league to struggle along on its own slim resources, not caring whether it survived or succumbed. Such a view is essentially the outlook of the narrow and parochial mind. If the league is to multiply its activities in the interests of the province, it is entitled to the fullest possible measure of financial aid from local bodies. The City Council has contented itself with the minimum. We trust that the rest of the contributors will be more generous.