NOTES AND COMMENTS.

West Coast Times, 15 June 1912, Page 2

NOTES AND COMMENTS.

The conference of representatives from the Local Bodies which have to bear the burden of the charitable aid rate met on Thursday, and after sitting in the morning and the afternoon, made as much progress as we anticipated it would do. The futility of a number of delegates meeting to discuss the Ways and means of a public institution into the affairs of which they had no insight or knowledge, must have been obvious to the most 'casual observer, and the delegates, especially those not occupying seats on the Westland Hospitals and Charitable Aid Board, wore quite in the dark. Nothing can be gained by a repetition of Thursday’s Conference unless the Charitable Aid Board lays bare its transactions and its thousand and one undertakings. As we remarked on Thursday there is little to bo gained by the Conference unless the delegates have all the information they require and 'are also , invested with power to compel those who are questioned to give replies. The whole question of the administration of charitable aid demands the closest scrutiny and investigation, and the members of the Board which controlled the affairs during the period covered by the now famous and much-tagged balance , sheet, l have by. their reticence and irritation, only themselves to blame if the public have put a wrong construction upon their actions.

Theke is one feature of Thursday’s Conference which requires some explanation. We refer to the non-attendance of the chairman of the Charitable Aid Board. Mr. Kennedy’s absence from the Conference was as inexplicable as it was undesirable, for wo feel bound to say that his presence at the Confer cnee was more necessary than any other delegate; and wo hardly anticipated that Mr. Kennedy would have slighted the Conference in such a way. II his attendance was necessary when the Borough Council’s sub-committee made its investigation, and ho has again and again declared that it was necessary, then he was doubly bound to pay the Conference of representatives of the Local Bodies at least the iaspect of being present in his capacity of Chairman of the Board under »review, and helping the Conference by placing all the information in his possession at the disposal of the Conference.

liiK more we dissect the b loan which tlio Mackenzie Government has endeavoured to float at rates so

ruinous to the country’s packer and its credit, tho loss wo like the whole business. As wo pointed out before tho loan is to all intents and purposes a five percent one, and tho information that the underwriters have been burdened with 87 pev cent of the issue, makes us wonder what the investors in the Old Land ico.lly think of New Zealand’s credit. But they have told us pretty clearly, for they only took 13 per cent of our loan. If, as the “London Times” points out, “ that the terms of the loan more nearly represent the facts as to the credit of New Zealand,” then our credit is not over good, for tho investing public, despite the short term ior which the money is borrowed, and the one per cent, underwriting, think very poorly of our credit. Is it any wonder ? When the State or the individual becomes an habitual visitor to the money lender, credit inevitably falls—and the New Zealand Government has been given a lesson which the people will do very well |o take to heart. Many years of Liberalism have degraded this country’s credit to such a low level as to make it necessary for the English underwriters to literally “hawk” our debentures about oven though they are only for a short tenth

The ex-Prmeier can look upon the failure of the loan as a result of his failure, either to get out of office when the country smashed his party to smithereens, or else, being determined to hang on until he was literally kicked out, to have conducted the financial affairs in a statesmanlike manner and arrange tho renewal of the country's loans when the market was favourable. But his inability to realise that the country was in earnest, prevented his doing either. He failed to get out and he failed to arrange the finances of tho country when the market was favourable. The big loan first issued is the result. New Zealand finds herself, after a reign of fron zied finance and years of scatter-cash policy, cap in , hand, hogging, -almost unheeded on an unsympatheticigiirket for money, with which to m«£Four obligations, and all this despite the fact that wo are offering unusually generous terms. That the loan is necessary, both the Premier and the exPremier agree. But for what purpose, here is where they do not agree. Sir Joseph Ward said that if tho loan had heeE: raised by him “four 'millions of capital would have been introduced into New Zealand.” ‘ Tim now Prime Minister does not substantiate the Member for Awarua, Mr, Mackenzie

stated that the loan “was principally fo" repayment of old loans maturing, advances already received in anticipation of receiving authorised loans, and for payment of the Dreadnought.’' Both these statements cannot be correct. One of these Liberals does not know what ho is talking about ! Which ? '