NO SAFEGUARDS

Taranaki Central Press, Volume IV, Issue 433, 14 May 1937, Page 2

NO SAFEGUARDS

IN PUBLIC WORKS PLAN Highly Dangerous i Although the Minister of Public Works denies that the undertakings comprising the Government’s extensive public workt programme are uneconomic, the taxpayers would feel a great deal more '’confidence on the point if this opinion was supported by an independent, investigational body (says a statement by the Associated Chamber of Commerce of New Zealand). The Na'ional Expenditure Commis. sion of 1932, after making definite recommendations as to future policy that should be followed in respect of different classes of uppublie works — recommendations which had been almost wholly ignored in the present 10 million pounds public works programme—put forward concrete proposals relative to an independent board of works, which it considered should oe set up. Non. Political Board. “We believe,” said the commission, “that before any public works are undertaken in the future, or before any assistance is given by the State to public works which are to be carried out by local authorities, the. proposals should first of all be subject to expert examination by an independent board of works some, whait akin to the Local Government Loans Board. It should be the duty of this board to review all matters' connected with proposed j works, or Government assistance in respect of proposed works, and to report" thereon to the Government. This board would require statutory powers. and we suggest that the legis. lotion should provide that in any case where. an adverse report is submHted by the board of works, the proposals should not be proceeded with, except 'with special legislative autho-" yity. • Wi’h ’the exception of a treasury representative, the board should, be entirely non.polEical and non*' technical'. c “This board,” continued the commission, ‘would naturally, have ad vies' and reports from the Public Works Department, and should be au'horised to "call for independent engineering, reports on, any subject. It -is not so ' much-ra. board 1 of professional men Is called for as a board of frusineas men capable of correctly estiriiaflhg the financial position and prospects and economic justification of proposed works.” No ti eps have apparently been taken to carry out this* most important recommendation since the time it wqs- 'made. Actually the p’Jtn goes back to the time the Publie Works Department wa s first eonsti'uted-^—in 1870 —the Act of that yhar providing for the appointment of. a board of advice to assist the MtaJs-ter of Public Works in the ailminiitratiOß of the Act. The idea is, i therefore, ;by no means a new one, and its application is more thlan ever necessary at the present time, when enormous expenditure on public works has again been entered into. ",., “Insufficient Consideration." It is a highly dangerous situation for a huge spending department like 4

the public Works Department to be judge and jury in its own case. The department determines which public works shall be undertaken, and when; it draws up its own designs; makes its own estimates, and carries out, its own construction. Its post ion is such that the way is open for political considerations, instead of economc considerations, to influence and determiffe activities. A proposed undertaking, which is desirable in itself, might better be held over for some future date. Other proposals may be plainly uneconomic—and certain of he new project* at present in hand undoubtedly are. What safeguard hlive the taxpayers against unwisie an uneconomic expenditure, which is going to increase their taxation, and burden the country with, debt for generations? Under the present system, they have no safeguard. All available evidence proves they need one. The Expenditure Commission, in giving a table of total expenditure out of the Public Works Fund up to 1931 on what might be termed “national development,” said- “It is worthy o£ note that, out of the total expenditure of £34,757,000, the only revenue-pro-ducing Lem is the amount of £1,226,. 000 which has been utilised for main highways, and upon which interest at 5 per cent. Ss being provided! out of the Public Works Fund constitutes a direct burden on taxation for interest and debt-Tedemption charges amounting to approximately £1,6.30.000. If this were the total expenditure on works of an unproductive na’ure, the position would be less alarming. This is, however, but a small part of the public-debt burden.” The Commission went on to quote a total nailway loss of £39,500,000, and losses in connection with of river improvement, river protection, land drainage, swamp drainage and land settlement, and said it was evident that insufficient consideration lilid been given in the past to ; the economic justification of many of the works which had been undertaken. It is believed that a proper conception had in many cases not been formed of the manner in which maintenance charges were to be financed on the completion of the work. To-day a vast public works programme hits again been launched, without any check or safeguard! such as a non.political board of works would provide, and under a pernicious .system. against which the gravest objections have been recorded.