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
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

TOO MUCH WORK.

ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF.

THE BRIDGE COMMISSION.

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,

REORGANISATION SUGGESTED

(By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Reporter.)

WELLINGTON, Wednesday.

Complete reorganisation of the Public Works Department was advocated by Mr. Fletcher (Grey Lynn) in the House to-night. He considered the engincer-in-chief should not be loaded with detail work, but- that separate departments should have their independent engineer, leaving only consultative work to the engineer-in-chief. It was a department spending one and a half millions, yet its head was appointed on the Auckland Harbour Bridge Commission, which would mean he must be away from his proper work at least three weeks. Then, having made a report, he would not be in a position' to advise his Minister on a matter of policy. Mr. Bitchener: Who would you put in his place? Mr. Fletcher: There are plenty of engineers; he is not the only ™ie in New Zealand. When advising the Government on the bridge question, continued Mr. Fletcher, the- cnginecr-in-chicf would be in a difficult position in advising whether the M-ork should be part of the national highway system, or should be left to the people of Auckland to run on a toll basis, because he would have already given his opinion in the harbour bridge report. A Member: Don't you want the bridge ? Mr. Fletclier: I am not saying the bridge should not be built. (Laughter.) I believe it should be built, but if the Commission decides against it on economic grounds, I would oppose money being spent on it. I want the work done on an economical basis. "I disagree entirely with the suggestion that the engineer-in-cliief should not be a member of the Bridge Commission," declared Mr. Harris (Waitemata), who followed. The inclusion of- the officer in the Public Works 'iervice. • would, he added, inspire the

greatest confidence in the minds of tlie people of Auckland. It was very essential that in a matter involving an expenditure of probably three-quarters of a million the personnel of the Commission to report on the subject should have the complete confidence of the people.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19291031.2.84

Bibliographic details

Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 258, 31 October 1929, Page 9

Word Count
341

TOO MUCH WORK. Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 258, 31 October 1929, Page 9

TOO MUCH WORK. Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 258, 31 October 1929, Page 9

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