REFUND ORDERED

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 218, 15 September 1930, Page 9

REFUND ORDERED

POWER BOARD PAYMENT SPECIAL COMMITTEES' PAY. SEQUEL TO MEMBER'S \ •' ' : CHARGES. JIOEE TALK ABOUT "LIONS." ■ Six members of the Waitemata Electric Power Board Who recently acted'on special committees' to investigate the. possibilities of developing unreticulated areas have been called upon by the Auditor-General to refund, within fourteen days, payments made to them for attendance at, committee meetings. It lias been ruled that the payments were "unlawfully made,"-and the members have no right of appeal in the matter. The decision of the Auditor-General is the sequel to charges made by a member of the board, Mr. W. B. Darlow, that the board had set up "dummy committees." The board considered that it had a satisfactory answer to the charges, and an explanation of its pr'o- • cedure was sent to the Audit Office in Wellington. The papers were referred to the Solicitor-General, who, after consideriiitr the purposes for which the committee? were set up, expressed the. opinion that it was not reasonably rpcessarv for the committees to consider any of the questions dealt with by . them, and, as their setting up was in ■inch circumstances. unnecessary, there was no authority for the board to make an v ; payments to the members ' for enhance at special meetings. . ■ ' . :,In conveying this finding to the board the Auditor-General said the payments -were • unlawfully, made and the Audit Office was required to recover to the '■board's account the amount involved.Failing notification'-by "the board of a • satisfactory adjustment of the matter by refund'he regretted that lie would have ho option but to surcharge the .ihienihers concerned with the amount. ' 'sHand in Your Resignations." . •'"/ The rceij-'t of the letter was the signal for a' lively discussion, during which -.many harsh things were fired across the 'board table. There was talk of "fighting the Department, but a solicitor's opinion on a corresponding case showed .■that the Auditor-General's decision was - filial • _ . . ' In. pressing fov a discussion of the .facts of the-case Mr. Darlow said the letter was the outcome of accusations made by him against the board some , months "ago, and was a complete vindication of-his charges.. 'When the public read the letter t\ey would readily underfstand- why a previous communication v from. ;thei Auditor-General was never . allowed to "see the .light of day." The - chairman (Mr. G. Trevithick) had said j ■ithat there was a satisfactory explanation of the matter, but the people -now line \v that the money that he- and other v members of - the board had taken ille-gally-out of their "pockets had to be •f,refunded. The point had been 'stressed : m a previous meeting ll'"■■sftfggest-pmwo* there is only one honourable attitude '"for tlie honourable membeib to take, and that is to hand ia their resignations,"' 'he said.. ■ ■'. 1 "Darlow in-Lions'Den." , V :Mr. S. E. Kennings: Darlow has come judgment, \is it Darlow tin tlie. lions' den?. ? , .. . , . f?;Mr. A. E. Greeusladc asked it doubt £as to:''.the procedure .of the board in getting up the committees was expresae at the time by any executive officer? if j Mr. Trevithick: No. doubt was exA. Robertson said the hoard get up the committees with the idea ot ; doing something.to assist the progress o the board. He was sure.the onembers, including Mr. Darlow,' were sincere in f;their decision.; * . J? Mr. Ddrlow admitted that lie was one of those who agreed to the appointment /.of the committees. He was a new. member '■at the time,- and/naturally allowed hiin- • eelf'to be guided by honorable members of the board. . . "Evidently the Auditor-General has been prepared to accept the statements of one member—which statements Instate are untrue —and besmirch the rest vof the board," said Mr. J. Mackie.. He considered the case should be submitted to the board's solicitor for interpretation. If the Auditor-General was right, the board would then have to bow their . heads and bear it. The opinion given by the Solicitor-General, was based on biased and unfair information. j "I think the whole thing is a matter of bluff," retorted Mr. Darlow. "Not one of you would fight the Auditor-General." Turning to Mr. Mackie he added: "You are one who is going to shell out." Mr. Mackie: I don't mind a bit. Mr. W. R. T. Leighton: It is not the shelling out, but the interference, that hurts. Mr. Trevithick: Even if the members have to refund a small amount, at any rate they have acquired knowledge that is going to be exceedingly useful to the . hoard. Presumably the Auditor-General considered that the committees should not have worked in conjunction with its engineer, when that officer could have taken stock himself. , The rights of miembers to represent their constituents, however, should be reserved. For that reasoD he considered there were times > when members could be of great use, in R legitimate way, by joining forces with the engineer. At the present stage, he Bid not think the board could do any More than receive the letter. "It is a pity that the trouble has arisen,, but now that we have read the AuditorGeneral's letter, I don't think any twinges of conscience should worry us," hei added. Legal Position Defined. . It was considered that a legal opinion given in connection with remuneration to members of the board for attending loan proposal meetings was applicable to the present case. The question then, ' arpse as to -whether the Auditor-General had power to surcharge members with the amount of their expenses, and whether his finding that they were not incurred on board business was conclusive. "The position," stated the opinion, is an extraordinary one. The Legislature lias conferred on the Audit Office . the right of forming an opinion on a question which may involve difficult legal considerations, and it has provided for no form of appeal against the conclusions of the office. Whether or not the conclusions are right or wrong is immaterial. i.. . Legislation of such a nature is to be Teprobated. It virtually deprives members'-of local bodies, who give their time to the public service, of the opportunity of having the decision of the Audit Office reviewed by the Courts. Such a state of affairs is intolerable, but is, nevertheless, the law of the land." The letter was received. ...