PAGE TEN

[HE oreoslrlozv 1.1351051? RE VEALS A

our.

Alarming Situation Revealed’

THE CH

a In Analysis OfPublicAccounts By The Leadergof The Opposition

(Continued from page 1)

lerent story, if he would. He could toll how many accounts are scatter- ed throughout the length and breadth of this Province that should have been raid last year and have not bean raid and are not included in the Public Art-cunts. We do not know what they ore, because they have done away with the External Audit. That is the situation. lion. Mr. lllclntyre; happen in your time ‘?" lion. Mr. Stewart; "Perhaps it did, but we disclosed it in the External, Auditor's report. We were honest ‘enouch to show it. lloll. I\lr. Mclntyrepyve can't dis- rltxse anything that is not in. lion. Mr. Stewart: "Did my hon. friend disclose the expenditure of over $13,000 in .his department for building the "highway" which bears his own name? Vl/hat about that? That was completed before the 31st of December. Why was it not put ln the Public Accounts? How many other bills that we have not heard of are south-red around? Why do we not get u list of those things '.’ They don't want to disclose them! That is why they did away with the External Audit, the only protection llm public had itgninst these gcntlc-

“Didn't that

men who are so fond of spcnding=

IIlOIIPY. (Applause) lion. Mr. McIntyre: Nu other Pro- vince in Canada has an outside llllfiil. V llnn, Mr. Stewart: My hon. friend has the bad habit of interrupting and making statements that he knows nothing about. l-le tries to de- monstrate knowledge that he does not possess. As I said, we have not. the information that should be be- fore this House in dealing with the 'Public Accounts. We know, by o. statement tabled the other day, that work of some kind had been under- taken under the federal employment scheme and that provincial revenues had been expended on those projects in order to make the federal grant available: but we do not know how much, and perhaps we never will, at feasts» long as these gentlemen are in jfijyer. ‘flluflis the situation. We do not knowfiwhere this Province stands w regard to its indebtedness; i? INTEREST CHARGES grim-re is another matter in con- rrection with the Public Accounts to oijtich I wish to refer. That is the nfotter of interest charges. I shall t e the figures just as I find them ggen here. The interest. of course, is ‘yable by the Province on its in- gbtedness. That indebtedness may ‘ in bonds, or bank overdraft, or shirt loans; but they are all lumped {aethcr as interest charges, and of : rse. the amount of interest should l£ieate the amount of the indebted- S. ivith these facts in mind, let us View thc financial situation. 1n 1926 if; last full your of Conservative axl- lstration, the interest was $74,- In 1920 it was $74.097, a slight lfltrense of some $300. We thought at t time that that was very strange. know that the debt of this Pro- ce had increased tremendously in t time and by searching the Pub- Accounts we found some entries t ucrc not carried into this col-

Province, on the basis of an interest payment of $74,997 as against $148,- 137, we find that it has doubled in one year. That ls the situation as we flnd it right on the faoe of their own blue books.

I shall now make a comparison of the increase in debt under the past two governments. My hon. friend the leader of the House had' a. great deal to say —when he got away from The Guardian-ab0ut “assets? That was his principal top- ic apart from the newspaper criti- cism that bothered him so much. The same thing was dealt with last year by his pl‘6dC'C€§Ol' in a most farcical manner. He capitalized, among other things, the roads that had been built. Now, I can quite un- dcrstand, in the case of a merchant or tradesman owning property, that if he wishes to ascertatln how he stands he will place a valuation on his stock and carry the figures over as assets. But why does he do that? Obviously because he can realize on them. That is what is done when you are winding up the estate of a bankrupt or a. deceased person. You make on inventory and you value the assets because you have to realize upon them; you have to convert them into car-h, But do We contemplate that this Province ls going to from; vcrt its roads, its ferries. its bridges, its public buildings and all those things into cash? It is a strange

afraid if this Government remains:

much longer in power, adding to the ' interest charges as it has been dolug during the Peat year, that we may have to do even that,—we may have to go under the hammer!

Valueless Statement

But let us not anticipate any such catastrophe. As a. matter of fact, o. statement of that kind, in working out the financial standing of the Province, is not worth anything. It is of no value whatever, because‘ we do not contemplate selling our grav- elled roads and other public works. What would we get for them if we did? A calculation of that kind does

suggestion, Mr. Speaker; but I am;

Auditor in this year’: report and by subtracting one from the other l find that they have increased the public debt by $758,994.

"But," my hon. friend guys, "look what we did; look at our assets." Well, I have already expressed my opinion with regard to the “assets? 1-Ie tnstanced gravelled roads; but I may remind him that he did not build the gravelled roads from that expenditure; he built them ou bor- rowed money.

Not The Whole Story But that is not the whole story.

amount that we did, according to the figures of their own auditors; but what of the rest of the story? 1t is indicated in the increase they had 1n their revenues during that period.

era! subsidy increase of $125,000 and railway taxation $40,000, they got during their period of office a

from gasoline tax and these other sources of revenue which we did not enjoy b0 the same extent, they re- ceived over $800,000. 1n all they received over $1,500,000 in revenue more than we ever got. We did get $80,000 in railway taxes; but dc- ducting that and adding the amount that they went behind in those years, we find that they went back to the tune of over two mil- lion dollars, altogether, during their term of office.

And yet, as I said before, we do not know all the story, because we have not got all the indebtedness. We do not know what it amounted to. I mentioned one item not ac- counted for in the Public Accounts, namely, the McIntyre Highway. How many other accounts are there of this nature, from one end of the Provincento the other?

My hon. friends talk about, what they have done. After all, what has this Province to show? We have this pile of road machinery; we have some culverts and bridges, but we had those before they ever attained

not help us in any way to pay off our debt. If the debt of this Province ls paid off, let us hope and trust it wlll not be doncby the selling of this old historic building or even our gravelled roads. We realize clearly enough, that it will have to be paid off by the people of this Province.

Whether the roads are worth a million dollars or a. hundred dollars, it will not help us to pay off the debt; so that all the time that has been taken up by my hon. friend ln giving these "assets" ls not worth a five-cent piece to the people of this Province. (Applause).

A TEST OF SINCERITI

power. Governments have been carrying on that kind of work for many years in this Province, not only concrete bridges and culverts, but more permanent structures. So there is nothing in that contention.

A Sorry Record

That, as it appears to me, is practically the whole situation with regard to the finances. Them is the record of this Government. They spent over two million dollars more ‘during their tenn than we did, either by borrowing money or from increased sources of revenue which we did not enjoy to the some ex-

If my hon. friend really believed that those expenditures are "assets" why did he not include them as such in the Public Accounts? Last night. in the course of his speech, he held up a sheet‘ of paper, and said: "Here are the assets." His predecessor, a year ago. did the same thing. We do not know what was on that paper; we were not taken into his con- fidence to that extent. Perhaps there was ‘nothing on lt for all we know. But if my hon. friend believes that

n at all that troulrl have increas- considcrnbly the amount as given. ut what do yvc find in the Ac- nts for i930? Here it is. in the

n and hank, $148,137." - '

at a jump In one year from .997 to $148,137. Multiply seventy r by lvio and it gives us one hun- d fnrty-cight—-sti that, ac- cording to their own blue-books, the interest on lh_~ indebtedness of the PrloVltide has doubled in one year!

Some "Fire"!

Isn't that some "tire"! 1s It any wonder there la some "smoke"? ls it any wonder my hon, friends have been trying to "smother" it‘! The flcures 1 have quoted are from their own Public Accounts. What will the taxpayers of this Province think when they see that comparison? Thcrc was a member of this House with whom I had the honor to sit some Ybars ago. He never made very long speeches, 7.. but there‘ was one thing he useoj~z$ifteu the Bell Gov- ernment on runny occasions. That was, that "wheri there is Interest there is Debt." Aiiaaftgr all, there u o. m of mun in it; up apply that

i < totbiscompurloiitioffliodobtoftha

that is the prop-r method. why do they not take the taxpayers into their confidence and place those "as-

tent: and yet my hon. friend will Isay that we "bought the people with ' their own money."—a most improper thing for a gentleman in his po- sition to say, because 1t is as far from the truth as it is , ible to be. . There is one thing that my hon. friend does not seem to understand. and that is that a. Government should keep its word to the electors. He does not know what that means. He knows this, however. that when we came in we promised to get 1n- creosed subsidy, and we told the people that if we got this increased

sets" with their valuation In the

ulnns which thm, q“, m... Inrrect. [Public Accounts so that we can all: I correct ..,",_.,,S, n" debenmms‘ nee m The mt that they u» not dol

it lo the very best evidence that they do not believe in it themselves. It ls simply u piece of camouflage, simply an excuse put up to "get by" with on the Budget debate.

I wish now to deal with the fig- ures given in the Public Accounts, and I do not think they will be dis- puted by my hon. friends. The leader of the Government gave one set of figures last night. That was the increase in debt during our time, from Sept. 1923 to Aug. 12, 1927. These figures are taken from the External Audit. My hon. friends seem to have been disgusted with the Poole and Scarth audit and they did away with the outside audit ul- together. However, the increase in public debt, roughly, was $413,000 under Conservative regime.

INCREASE IN DEBT

Now let us take their period from 1927 b0 _tl'le end of i930. I take the debt, us shown by their own auditors Messrs. Poole and earth u of Aug. 12. 1921, and I take the debt u shown by the Prflm

~.n' , . "Pmifiliflfitttiiifi Eff.‘ ' '

iloAonouutaklvioltbo-oguiruip

subsidy we would give them some re- lief from taxation. And because we wanted to keep our promise we did it. (Applause)

Let me tell my hon. friend that when he criticises us for that sort of thing he should begin to look at his own record within the lost few weeks. He should not talk about "buying the people" or catering to the people before on election, when he is giving consideration to u Tick- et of Leave Act, when he goes buck to Statute Labour and all thoee things that are so plainly an attempt on this Gwwmrnent’: part to buy the people-not even with their ovm money, but Just fooling them.

I have already ‘iscusaed govern- mental housekeeping when I was dealing with the revenue and expen- diture. I think it is only fair, howev- er. that I should make a compari- son between the lut year that our government was 1n power and the post year, 1930, which will be lut full year under this Dlfllllnchtll’? term. In that respect the your: cor- respond to one another, and I shall take the classification of expendit- ures u they are shown in the Pub-

‘They went behind almost double the‘

In the first place, from the fed~| - partment.

men‘ departmentfor the correspond- ing years. .

STRIKING COMPARISON

Int us begin first with the Admin- istration of Justice. In 1926 the ex- pendlture in this department w" 337.199. Last year it was $49.795.— . or an Increase of over 812,000. Why [that should be so 1 do not know. 1

i will venture the statement that there

was not any better enforcement in mite of increased expenditure-

Degflrflmenfi of Agriculture: In 192G the expenditure was 33.5.393- LIA! your 1t was 858.332. Of course, the Prime Minister will any that he did so much; but I do not think the people will stand behind him in that stateme ‘.

Premier lieu: Does my hon. friend moan to say that that is for Agricul-

y ture? -

lion. Mr. Stewart: 1t is in Y0“! d9’

Premier bee: But n10’ hon. friend knows um we are paving for public

total of $880,000 and according to my hum‘ that w“ not’ pa“ ‘at in m? calculation of whet they received; "Id m‘ "hwl “when” m‘ imp” '

ors.

lion. Mr. Stewart: Where is he get- ting the money for school inspectors?

Premier Lea: Well, we are Btfliihl; it out of the technical Brant.

(Continuing amid further ruptions by the Premier, Mr. Stew- art insisted on his right to the floor. He had not interrupted the leader of the House when he was speaking tfilld he demanded the same court- l esy.) ,-

Promler Lou: Your akin is tender. Hon. Mr. Stewart: Not 50 tthdel‘ as some of my friends‘. It l8 ml? l0 tender that I would spend an hour i in attacking u newspaper. (Apnlluofi- Department of Education: In 1926 the expenditure woo $180,869. limit lyear it was $306,890; mother i"- I crease.

Public Works: We expended $122-- l539. Iflbli year-note this-the eitlmn‘ dlture was 8325.488. This ts an en- ormoua ‘increase, practically thrfl times the expenditure in 10M. I ' shall deal with this department lat/er. Faloonwood Hospital: We spent

penditure was $136,278. Yet there were fewer patients lust W". ""1 there was no “t. a 9X: "‘ ure that I can see in looking over the Accounts. But there 1| an lncrelle of practically $0,000.

Then we come to that item with which I have already dealt: Interest. It W98 $74,646 in 1921; last year it was $147,137. I need 8B0’ 1'10 m9" ‘m this subjoct; the flllllfl 51"“ V"! nluch louder than my words that I can use.

Legislative Grants: This is not 8 large expenditure but. it is a niece where money can be 5119M W!‘ I?!“ elling expenses by gentlemen who like to travel around at the expense of the Government. The lesi-lll-llve grants in 1926 were 818,419; last yea: they were $80,478, or practically double. '

Auditor's Account

Auditor: 1n our time the expendit- ure was $2.470. Last veer it was $4,582; almost double. ‘There is some- thing peculiar about that item to which I might dnw the attention of the House. I refer to Part 8, Clas- sification of expendituru. On page l2, under Audit Oflice, we read: "John Anderson, 81800: Wm. E. Mu- sey, $900." 50m reminded me that the latter gentleman, if he was of any value as on expert account- ant. was giving his services very cheaply; but on going carefully through the Accounts I found at the top of Page 11, among the Miscel- aneous items: “Salary. William E. Massey, 3750." I um not going to in- vite my hon. friends to interrupt me again; I know they will take vary little invitation in do that; but I um going to invite some of them who follow me to explain why those lt- ems were split up and one port o! the salary placed where they thought. nobody would see it.

lion. Mr. LePage: 1t is not hid. It la right there. ' Hon. Mr. Stewart: I know it is

there, but why put It whore no one would think of looking for it. That will be an excellent thing for my hon. friend to take up when he speaks. u I suppose he will at the earliest opportunity.

There is another item to which I might cull attention. m expendit- ure on the hovirielul Building in: $5.3M in our time. Loot you ft was 80,024. That Just shows how the cost of everything has gone up under than gentlemen; how they have tu-

orund even tbo smallest items tn

ARLOTTETOWN GUAR ' ' ' ;

- building. In connection with their

,__,____ _ ______...__ __..___. . .. _._i'_—'“_'-.:"' ""1::$.——____ A!‘ '“ "‘ '

I _ ._‘ W. Q‘ hoiugkggplng in ggygnggflgn with this this great spending department. I l-loavy link tin thou cues. I vmi looking W", the

expenditure there h not anything

from velvet pile carpet to lulurlom furnishing: of all kinds. lt ls paid for by the taxpayer: of the Province, so whet do they are?

PUBLIC WORKS

Now I come to the‘ ‘Public Works Department. If I were to designate myhon. friend the Minister of that department I would not refer to him. u his friends do so lervtlely on the other side of the House. as "the greatest Minister of Public Works that this Province has ever had." and ‘all that sort of thing. Instead, I ‘would have a tag put over his door with the inscription: "Wasting and Squundring here."

lion. Mr. McIntyre: 0r, “abandon hope all ve who enterhere."

lion. Mr. Stewart: ‘Ihut is not what my hon. friend says. ‘Ihat ls the trouble. If my hon. friend makes u speech like the reaches he delivered on other occasions in this House, he will go over every district and tell us what he did and how he gave them everything they wanted. That is why he is such a. ‘nice fellow! Ile has lots of money to spend, and If he hasn't got it he can always bor- row it. I

llou. Mr. McIntyre: You did too.

Hon. Mr. Stewart: Not to anything like the sune extent, and my Mn. friend knows it. The first thing that it ‘roduced our "big minister" to the people of this Province was a tele- phone order sent to St. John for the purchase of $100,000 of road machin-

inter- .

$106,579 in 1926. Lost year the ex- -

ery. My hon. friend mode a bad start, because, as I pointed out before, he violated all precedent. lie almost {violated the law. He bought without ‘authority; but he tried to assure us at that time that he was saving this money because these road machines would be so economical in operation that they would be a saving in the end. Having made this big initial in- vestment. he sold. we would be able to so on without any great expen- diture, and the saving throughout the coming years would be evident as we went along.

Costly Mach‘ y Let us see how true this state- ment was.

The colt of repair! and spare parts of these road machines in 1928, the flnit year of their operotiou when they were practically new, was $12,028.49.

In 1929 their cost was 824.2203. Lest year, their coat vvu practically $41,000.

That was the mousy expended on thue “ Just for ‘- , and repair. It does not include the wages of the men employed on the machines, who carried on the work.

My hon. friend says that we,were old fashioned, that our road system was antiquated, that we were doing the work with pick and shovel. I may remind him of the fact that we did introduce these machines. We did not make such u. plunge into expenditure but we began the use of them and. of course, in the past few years many improvements have been made in road machinery,

However, there was one thing to be said in favor of the “pick and shovel." Many people have corn- plalned to me that they have teen roads lost year that were done with road machines and that could have been done with e horse and curt for half the money.