MANY AMENDMENTS.

Auckland Star, Volume LXII, Issue 72, 26 March 1931, Page 14

MANY AMENDMENTS.

HARBOUR BRIDGE BILL

CITY COUNCIL'S CRITICISM

SAFEGUARDS DEMANDED,

Like several other local bodies, Auckland City Council has not yet arrived at a deflnate decision regarding the proposed harbour bridge bill. At a special meeting yesterday afternoon, a number of respects in which the draft bill is considered unacceptable were brought forward. A report from the finance committee was eventually approved, and a special sub-connnittee was appointed for the purpose of conferring with the Harbour Bridge Company, and with other local bodies, with power, to agree to amendments and to settle minor and consequential amendments. The finance committee mentioned 11 respects in which tiiey considered the bill unacceptable. Reports were also submitted by the city solicitor, and the city engineer, both of whom suggested various alterations. The committee's first point was that as the company's resources were very limited, and the cost of the bridge might well exceed the contract price, it was essential that a substantial guarantee should be provided to ensure that if the construction of the bridge was begun it would be completed'. A definite time for completion of the bridge should be stated. The council's approval should be required of plans, specifications, contract price, approaches, access streets and numerous other matters. Under section 115 and 110 the council might be called on without its consent to take over an unfinished structure and assume liability for the whole costs of the venture, stated, the committee. It should be made clear that in no case would the funds of any local T>ody be saddled with liability in respect of the bridge if it were uncompleted or unprofitable. Provision should be made that at least the two local bodies whose territory abutted on the bridge should be consulted as to the determination of the controlling authority, and provision should also be ma«le fa.* future upkeep. Safeguards for Local Bodies. It was proposed to put the bridge entirely outside the jurisdiction of any local body. It should be deemed to be within the city up to a certain point, and within the borough of Northcote for the rest of its length, and the company's by-laws should be subject to the approval of those two' bodies. The maximum rate of interest should be 7 per cent instead of 9 per cent (on borrowed capital), and local bodies- should have the right to take over the bridge at any time, paying only the outstanding liabilities and the share capital. The provision by which shareholders should receive a dividend of 10 per cent, even though receipts were not sufficient to pay the sinking fund, should be revised. Necessary work -near the bridge approach should be included as of its cost. Finally the committee recommended that the council should ascertain whether the company was prepared to make the amendments suggested. Unless it was clear that financial interests were prepared to find all the money required without any expectation of repayment except-from tolls it was useless for the company to proceed with its bill. The Mayor, Mr. G. Baildon, moved that the report be approved and that a subcommittee, consisting of himself, Mr. J. Dempsey, and Mr. T. Bloodworth (chairman of the To>vn Planning Committee), be appointed to confer with the company and other local bodies. Mr. A. J. Entriean said he did not think anything .could be done to deal effectively with the bill' during the present session. In the meantime the council was not doing anything to hinder it.

Directors and Their Fees. Mr. G'. W. Hutchison, said the report appeared to be properly drawn, yet there appeared to be no special power to deal with objectionable clauses. .Twelve ..was an unnecessarily large number of directors. Jn his opinion, nine was sufficient. "I think it is a pity that the company has seen fit to put in a'suggestion for the payment of the directors. Such a service should not be for personal gain, and the matter should be approached purely from the point of view of public service," said Mr. Hutchi'son. It would be observed that the schedule of by-laws proposed power to enforce fines, and it was evident that these fines were to be paid in aid of the company's funds. This was a daingerous precedent, and the matter should be fully investigated beforehand. I Clause CO provided for "extras," in the event of further employment beingneeded, but there was no sugegstion of provision in case the amount of labour fell below that which had been , estimated. Other clauses in the bill were such as to need careful investigation by the City Council's solicitor. "Too Much Responsibility." Mr. Grey Campbell said he thought the Mayor's motion was putting too much responsibility on the sub-com-mittee. The final of the committee's report should be referred back to the council for consideration. Mr. E. J. Phelan wanted to know what provision was made for compensating people whose property might be spoilt by the bridge approaches. < ■ Mr, Bloodworth said the council did not want to be accused of holding up the bill during a brief Parliamentary session. Mr. H. P. Burton said that even if the bill did pass through the House of Representatives this session, it did not follow that it would pass into law. Miss Basten said some clause' should be inserted into the provisions of the bill to ensure that there should be no undue' importation of labour-from outside the Dominion. Mr. Campbell's amendment that the committee's final report be refered back to a special meeting of the council, was seconded by Mr. J. R. Lundon. After further discussion the amendment was lost, as was a further one hy Mr. Lundon that the report be referred back to the Finance Committee. The Mayor's motion was then earned.