Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

STINKING FISH.

The "Herald" and the Record Surplus.

THE silly old Herald, in its unreasoning hatred of a Liberal

Government, becomes more illogical and untruthful every day. The most recent illustration of this undeniable fact is furnished by its attitude on the question of the record surplus for the year just closed, which has been announced by the Hon. W. HallJones. If there was no surplus, and the consolidated fund showed a deficit, the Herald would denounce the extravagance of the existing administration and declare that the colony was rushing headlong to financial perdition. But, when there is again a surplus, and a record one at that, the Herald displays its chagrin, prejudice, and utter want of patriotism by loudly declaring that the surplus is mythical, and has been produced by a system of faked book-keeping. This also in the face of the fact that during the year £775,000 of the surplus has been transferred from consolidated rtvenue to public works, and is actually being spent in the construction of railways, roads and other improvements.

The Herald further says that Jthe surplus has been made by the process of not expending the allocations made by Parliament last year. Finally, with that calm disregard of the truth which has become characteristic of the Hkrald, it alleges that the surplus is made by starving the public departments. Now, here are three definite charges in the compass of one short article. The surplus has been made by faked book-keeping, by unexpended allocations, and by starving the public departments. But if the Heratd had condescended to give intelligent attention to the figures quoted by the Hon. W. Hall - Jones, it would have discovered that all three charges are equally baseless. The surplus of £717,825 exißts'solely and simply because there was an increse of revenue during the year 0f ; '£814,716.

For example, the customs revenue increased by £2^3,629. That was clear profit, and without any necessity for faked book-keeping, counts as more than a quarter million towards the surplus. So also with railways. There was an additional revenue under this heading of £282,978. These two items alone furnish £526 607 out of the surplus of £717,825. And so again with other items. Stamps, land and income tax, and other sources of revenue all show substantial increases. And be it remembered that our information is taken from the Herald itself, from a column parallel with that in which the untruthful comment appears, and not from any source of knowledge thac is denied to the Herald. Taken as a whole, the figures show conclusively that the surplus is made up wholly of increases of revenue, and is not dependent for its volume on faked bookkeeping, unexpended allocations, or starved departments. The votes of Parliament have been and are being faithfully spent. It is not right nor lawful for the Government to proceed beyond those votes without the sanction of Parliament.

So much for the Herald's blind and bitter bias against the Government. But how about the H"rald's want of patriotism and its bias against the country ? If it were possessed of a soul above class prejudice, and were inspired by a disinterested desire for the well-being of New Zealand, it would find in this marvellous increase of our revenue a reason for pride and congratulation, instead of perpetually crying stinking fish, to the injury of our credit and the besmirching of our reputation for progressive colonization. The Herald is perpetually harping on the necessity of maintaining a sourid credit abroad. Is this stinking fish policy a reasonable way of maintaining it ? Here we have unquestionably a substantial purplus from increased revenue that any colony might be proud of. The Hsrald, however, endeavours to poison the minds of those at a distance, who are looking with envious eyes on this progressive country, by declaring that our surplus, of which we have so much reason to be proud, is created by faked book-keeping, unexpended allocations, and starving public departments.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TO19070511.2.3.1

Bibliographic details

Observer, Volume XXVII, Issue 34, 11 May 1907, Page 2

Word Count
660

STINKING FISH. Observer, Volume XXVII, Issue 34, 11 May 1907, Page 2

STINKING FISH. Observer, Volume XXVII, Issue 34, 11 May 1907, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert