DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.68025#0131
ROYAL COMMISSION UPON DECENTRALIZATION.
125
17513. Do you see any disadvantage in that, and
would you apply a rule with regard to Secretaries in
Bengal ?—I think so, say, three or four years.
17514. You are satisfied, generally speaking, with
the existing financial relations between the provincial
Governments and the Government of India, but you
think the Local Governments might have considerably
more powers in detail ?—That is my opinion.
17515. As Financial Secretary to the Local Govern-
ment you deal with your own budget ?—Yes.
17516. You have to send it up to the Government
of India ?—Yes.
17517. Did the Government of India alter it very
much ?—No, not very much.
17518. When they did alter it, for what reason was
it altered ?—So far as I can recollect they cut it down
simply because they thought we would not be able to
spend as much as we were asking for ; it was simply
in the interest of accurate estimating.
17519. Did you get a formal assurance in such cases
that if there anticipations were belied and it was
found that you could spend the money and had it
available, you would be permitted to do so ?—Yes.
17520. As far as your experience goes were such
alterations as the Government of India made justified
by actual facts ?—I can hardly answer that question,
because I only sent in one budget and left in
September.
17521. Had you studied any of your predecessors’
budgets?—Yes, and I think, on the whole, the
Government of India were correct, and that the Local
Government would not have been able to spend up to
the amount represented.
17522. It has been represented to us in Madras,
that though the Government of India might be quite
correct in making a lump cut in the budget, it gave a
great deal of trouble to the provincial Government in
distributing the reduction to be made over the various
sub-heads ; have you found that to be so ?—No, I
have not experienced any trouble, and it could be
done relatively easily.
17523. It has been suggested from various sources
that the Government of India might be able to relax
their control over provincial expenditure more, if all
the divided heads were made entirely provincial; do
you see any advantage in that ?—I cannot see any
reason for it; I do not see what advantage would be
gained.
17524. One advantage claimed for it was this : at
present if you take a divided head the Government of
India is concerned with half the expenditure ; there-
fore, in the interests of accurate estimating, with
regard to the imperial surplus, you must if, necessary,
cut the provincial figures : the advocates of the other
plan urge that as the whole of the expenditure is
provincial, the Government of India need not concern
themselves about the accuracy of the figures, and need
not therefore interfere with them ?—I believe the
Government of India try to concern themselves with
the accuracy of all Government figures.
17525. May I take it that in your opinion the
imperial and provincial budgets should be exhibited
together so that the provincial figures shall form an
integral part of the imperial budget ?—I think so.
17526. In matters of education and forests, or
anything else, you must show the expenditure under
each head, otherwise the public would not get an idea
of the financial expenditure under the various heads
of administration ?—Yes.
17527. It has been suggested that the provincial
Government might take the whole of its land revenue,
say, and hand over the other heads of divided revenue
to the Imperial Government—do you see any
advantage in that ?—I can see no advantage in it
at all.
17528. Might there not be some disadvantage in it?
■—I should think so ; I think the Local Government
has a great interest in having revenues divided.
17529. Would you take the revenue from excise as
an example ?—I do not think that is a good example
to take, because it is so important a subject from the
administrative (apart from the revenue) point of view
that the Local Government could never afford to
neglect it. Take, for example, customs, which is
imperial—I do not think the Local Government takes
much interest in customs.
17530. Outside the heads of revenue which are
wholly provincial, such as registration, is a system of
partnership really best for both sides?—I think so,
decidedly.
17531. Would it be an improvement, or would it be
necessary in the interests of administrative efficiency,
to give Local Governments a share in the customs ?—
No, because customs is peculiarly a department which
can well be administered by the Imperial Government
direct. Foreign countries are so largely concerned,
that it is very desirable to have a uniform system of
treatment, and the customs should be treated at
Bombay in the same way as they are treated at
Calcutta and other places.
17532. Are you in entire agreement with the Local
Government as regards the grant to them generally of
larger powers as to salaries, appointments, pensions,
travelling and local allowance rules, and so forth ?—
I have not studied the proposals very closely, but, on
the whole, I agree.
17533. Do you think, speaking generally, that the
control proposed by the Civil Service Regulations in
such matters as travelling allowance is too rigid, and
that the Local Governments should have larger
powers?—I think so, certainly. For instance, with
regard to travelling allowance, that is a small matter
which a Local Government ought to. be able to
administer for itself.
17534. Would you admit the desirability of some
general rules or instructions being issued by the
Government of India ?—Yes, leaving matters of detail
to the Local Government.
17535. At present the Accountant-General is en-
tirely independent of the Local Government, and it is
his duty to challenge any case in which the Local
Government has, as he thinks, exceeded its financial
powers ?—Yes.
17536. In that case, if the Local Government cannot
satisfy him, does the matter go to the Government of
India?—Yes.
17537. The same position applies, as between the
Government of India itself and the Secretary of
State ?—Yes.
17538. It has been suggested that in cases of dispute
as to the application of some rule under the Civil
Service Regulations or some other Financial Code, the
Local Government might have power to over-rule the
Accountant-General; would that be safe?—Not in a
matter of interpretation.
17539. If a Local Government said “ We think
under this rule we have power to do this,” and the
Accountant-General said “ I do not think you have-
you must go to the Government of India,” do you
think that ought to be preserved ?—Yes, but I should,
of course, look to the Accountant-General not to strain
anything too much.
17540. Do you further regard it as a necessity that
the financial powers given to Local Governments and
to the Government of India should not be over-
stepped ?—I think so.
17541. Are the present regulations quite satisfactory
as between the Local Government and the Audit
Department ?—They are satisfactory, but the Accoun-
tant-General sends up too much. I should like to see
him invested with larger discretionary power than he
has at present. It is of no value to the Bengal
Government to have a memorandum to the effect that
Rs. 3| was wrongly expended four years ago, and
asking for an explanation.
17542. You are now speaking, not as between the
Local Government and the Government of India, but
as between the Local Government and its own
authorities?—No, the Accountant-General sends it up.
17543. But if it is a matter affecting the financial
powers of the Local Government, is there any question
as to the Local Government overstraining its powers ?
—No, what I say is that the Accountant-General need
not send it up.
17544. In regard to the financial relations between
the Local Government and the Government of India
in cases where the Accountant-General occasionally
Mr. II. J.
McIntosh.
3 Jan., 1908.
125
17513. Do you see any disadvantage in that, and
would you apply a rule with regard to Secretaries in
Bengal ?—I think so, say, three or four years.
17514. You are satisfied, generally speaking, with
the existing financial relations between the provincial
Governments and the Government of India, but you
think the Local Governments might have considerably
more powers in detail ?—That is my opinion.
17515. As Financial Secretary to the Local Govern-
ment you deal with your own budget ?—Yes.
17516. You have to send it up to the Government
of India ?—Yes.
17517. Did the Government of India alter it very
much ?—No, not very much.
17518. When they did alter it, for what reason was
it altered ?—So far as I can recollect they cut it down
simply because they thought we would not be able to
spend as much as we were asking for ; it was simply
in the interest of accurate estimating.
17519. Did you get a formal assurance in such cases
that if there anticipations were belied and it was
found that you could spend the money and had it
available, you would be permitted to do so ?—Yes.
17520. As far as your experience goes were such
alterations as the Government of India made justified
by actual facts ?—I can hardly answer that question,
because I only sent in one budget and left in
September.
17521. Had you studied any of your predecessors’
budgets?—Yes, and I think, on the whole, the
Government of India were correct, and that the Local
Government would not have been able to spend up to
the amount represented.
17522. It has been represented to us in Madras,
that though the Government of India might be quite
correct in making a lump cut in the budget, it gave a
great deal of trouble to the provincial Government in
distributing the reduction to be made over the various
sub-heads ; have you found that to be so ?—No, I
have not experienced any trouble, and it could be
done relatively easily.
17523. It has been suggested from various sources
that the Government of India might be able to relax
their control over provincial expenditure more, if all
the divided heads were made entirely provincial; do
you see any advantage in that ?—I cannot see any
reason for it; I do not see what advantage would be
gained.
17524. One advantage claimed for it was this : at
present if you take a divided head the Government of
India is concerned with half the expenditure ; there-
fore, in the interests of accurate estimating, with
regard to the imperial surplus, you must if, necessary,
cut the provincial figures : the advocates of the other
plan urge that as the whole of the expenditure is
provincial, the Government of India need not concern
themselves about the accuracy of the figures, and need
not therefore interfere with them ?—I believe the
Government of India try to concern themselves with
the accuracy of all Government figures.
17525. May I take it that in your opinion the
imperial and provincial budgets should be exhibited
together so that the provincial figures shall form an
integral part of the imperial budget ?—I think so.
17526. In matters of education and forests, or
anything else, you must show the expenditure under
each head, otherwise the public would not get an idea
of the financial expenditure under the various heads
of administration ?—Yes.
17527. It has been suggested that the provincial
Government might take the whole of its land revenue,
say, and hand over the other heads of divided revenue
to the Imperial Government—do you see any
advantage in that ?—I can see no advantage in it
at all.
17528. Might there not be some disadvantage in it?
■—I should think so ; I think the Local Government
has a great interest in having revenues divided.
17529. Would you take the revenue from excise as
an example ?—I do not think that is a good example
to take, because it is so important a subject from the
administrative (apart from the revenue) point of view
that the Local Government could never afford to
neglect it. Take, for example, customs, which is
imperial—I do not think the Local Government takes
much interest in customs.
17530. Outside the heads of revenue which are
wholly provincial, such as registration, is a system of
partnership really best for both sides?—I think so,
decidedly.
17531. Would it be an improvement, or would it be
necessary in the interests of administrative efficiency,
to give Local Governments a share in the customs ?—
No, because customs is peculiarly a department which
can well be administered by the Imperial Government
direct. Foreign countries are so largely concerned,
that it is very desirable to have a uniform system of
treatment, and the customs should be treated at
Bombay in the same way as they are treated at
Calcutta and other places.
17532. Are you in entire agreement with the Local
Government as regards the grant to them generally of
larger powers as to salaries, appointments, pensions,
travelling and local allowance rules, and so forth ?—
I have not studied the proposals very closely, but, on
the whole, I agree.
17533. Do you think, speaking generally, that the
control proposed by the Civil Service Regulations in
such matters as travelling allowance is too rigid, and
that the Local Governments should have larger
powers?—I think so, certainly. For instance, with
regard to travelling allowance, that is a small matter
which a Local Government ought to. be able to
administer for itself.
17534. Would you admit the desirability of some
general rules or instructions being issued by the
Government of India ?—Yes, leaving matters of detail
to the Local Government.
17535. At present the Accountant-General is en-
tirely independent of the Local Government, and it is
his duty to challenge any case in which the Local
Government has, as he thinks, exceeded its financial
powers ?—Yes.
17536. In that case, if the Local Government cannot
satisfy him, does the matter go to the Government of
India?—Yes.
17537. The same position applies, as between the
Government of India itself and the Secretary of
State ?—Yes.
17538. It has been suggested that in cases of dispute
as to the application of some rule under the Civil
Service Regulations or some other Financial Code, the
Local Government might have power to over-rule the
Accountant-General; would that be safe?—Not in a
matter of interpretation.
17539. If a Local Government said “ We think
under this rule we have power to do this,” and the
Accountant-General said “ I do not think you have-
you must go to the Government of India,” do you
think that ought to be preserved ?—Yes, but I should,
of course, look to the Accountant-General not to strain
anything too much.
17540. Do you further regard it as a necessity that
the financial powers given to Local Governments and
to the Government of India should not be over-
stepped ?—I think so.
17541. Are the present regulations quite satisfactory
as between the Local Government and the Audit
Department ?—They are satisfactory, but the Accoun-
tant-General sends up too much. I should like to see
him invested with larger discretionary power than he
has at present. It is of no value to the Bengal
Government to have a memorandum to the effect that
Rs. 3| was wrongly expended four years ago, and
asking for an explanation.
17542. You are now speaking, not as between the
Local Government and the Government of India, but
as between the Local Government and its own
authorities?—No, the Accountant-General sends it up.
17543. But if it is a matter affecting the financial
powers of the Local Government, is there any question
as to the Local Government overstraining its powers ?
—No, what I say is that the Accountant-General need
not send it up.
17544. In regard to the financial relations between
the Local Government and the Government of India
in cases where the Accountant-General occasionally
Mr. II. J.
McIntosh.
3 Jan., 1908.