I—lo

12

by the Commissioners of Audit, before it is presented to Parliament. We know what money has been issued as unauthorized expenditure, and the Treasury submits to Parliament estimates authorizing the expenditure of that amount, and charges it to any vote it thinks fit. If we saw that there was any discrepancy between the amount submitted to Parliament and that which we had issued we should represent to Parliament that it was not a correct statement. 111. Do you put out any items ?—Just the same as if on the original estimates. If you will look at any Appropriation Act, you will see how it is done. The estimate is always stated in detail, and printed in smaller type. We audit that very carefully, to see that the items of unauthorized expenditure are those which we have issued. Then, Bection 14 of the Act of 1872 says, " The Colonial Treasurer may issue money in excess of or without the appropriation of Parliament to an amount not exceeding the sum authorized to be issued by way of deficiency bills." There was at one time a little discussion as to what the word " authorized " meant—whether authorized by Parliament or by Ministers ; and it was held that it could not mean the authority of Ministers, because it would be really what I said—so absurd that the more your cash was short the more you might outrun the expenditure. We therefore held it to mean authorized by the Act of 1871—that is, £100,000. 112. Mr. Johnston.] Having issued deficiency bills to the amount of £50,000 in one year, if these were not taken up, could you issue deficiency bills for £100,000 next year ?—No, only £50,000. The practice we hold to be, that Ministers have a margin of £100,000 for unauthorized expenditure, to be voted by Parliament next year. 113. Mr. Stevens.~\ Tour meaning 1 understand to be this : That, in the view of the Audit Department, the clause by which the issue of deficiency bills is fixed is merely a clumsy way of saying, " You will have £100.000 unauthorized expenditure in each year" ?—That is the way in which we have always interpreted it. Any unauthorized expenditure that takes place before or during the Session must be sanctioned in the then Session; and any which takes place after the Session will require an indemnity in the subsequent year. 114. Hon. Mr. Stafford.'] Suppose this takes place : that the unauthorized expenditure which you issue is duly placed upon the estimates, and that Parliament refuses to pass a vote for some of the items, what would be the position of the Control Department then towards the Treasury ?—I am not prepared to say. One of my clerks came to me yesterday morning, and said he observed by the paper that the vote had been cut off for an officer who had been receiving pay since July, and he asked me what was to be done under the circumstances. 115. Sir G. Grey I] Supposing that in one year, just before Parliament met, £100,000 had been advanced as unauthorized expenditure, and there was a dispute between Parliament and Ministers, and Parliament determined to give no supply until the grievance was redressed, and refused to pass any vote for an advance, would the Auditors be justified in giving an advance of £100,000 to enable the Government to carry on, the Government undertaking to put that in a vote before Parliament ? If you give the £100,000 which the Government asks for, you defeat the Parliament. Would you do it? —Yes ;we have no power to refuse to issue for unauthorized expenditure. The Committee will of course understand that in all Parliaments, unless the Session takes place a sufficiently long time before the conclusion of the financial year to pass the estimates, there must be a period provided for by Imprest Supply Bills, in which there is an uncertainty as to how the money shall be charged. The estimates are put into our hands as soon as possible, and we are obliged to go on charging on the estimates until they are passed, under the authority of the Imprest Supply Bill. We issue under the Imprest Supply Bill, which requires that the expenditure shall he included in the estimates of the year. 116. Suppose there was no Imprest Supply Bill? —We should not then issue any money. 117. What I understand is that you issue money on account of unauthorized expenditure previous to a vote ?—I mean that we treat the item Unauthorized Expenditure just as we treat any vote. We should issue or refuse to issue in just the same way. 118. You would give the £100,000 in the case I speak of ?—We should not give the £100,000 or any part of it without an undertaking from the Treasury that it was to be included in the estimates of that year. 119. Then, if the Government could not carry their estimates, still they would get it by promising to put it on the estimates, and thereby defeat Parliament ?—I do not see how Ministers could defeat Parliament, when it is Parliament that confers their powers with regard to unauthorized expenditure. 120. Supposing no Imprest Supply Bill were passed?—lf there was no Imprest Supply Bill passed, we should not issue except for permanent charges. After an Imprest Supply Bill is passed, and it is nearly exhausted, we keep the Treasury informed that we shall stop issuing, and then they go to the House for another Imprest Supply Bill. 121. Hon. Mr. Stafford.] Are the Committee to understand that you really require the authority of an Imprest Supply Act for any issues on the commencement of the new financial year?—l think so. 122. Is it not the case that the Control Department issues lump sums of money on warrants, which are passed from the Public Account to the account of the Secretary of the Treasury or the Paymaster ? —No. 123. Has the Secretary to the Treasury, or Paymaster, got no separate account ?■ —No. 124. Then the Bank pays only on detail cheques. Who draws these detail cheques ? Suppose, for instance, that in the case of the Armed Constabulary the sum of £500 is wanted for monthly salaries, and that is made up of a number of detail payments to members of the corps, through what form are those detail payments made ? Suppose the Defence Minister authorizes the issue of £500, and he does not pay it to any one person, but wants it distributed, what process is gone through so that ultimately the vouchers come back ? —There are two distinct processes —payments direct and payments by imprest. In the case you put, the whole Defence Force are paid by monthly imprest to the Paymasters of the several corps. All imprestees account weekly, except those authorized by the Treasury to account monthly. Then we issue the sum required by way of imprest each month, and