The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, The Echo and The Sun. TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 1932. CITY AND SUBURBS.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 57, 8 March 1932, Page 6

The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, The Echo and The Sun.

TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 1932. CITY AND SUBURBS.

For the cause that lacks assistance, For the wrong that needs resistance, For the future in the distance, And the s/ood that <u>e can do.

The controversy that is raging in Mount Eden and Mount Albert, and will be settled at to-morrow's poll, is complex and not devoid of humour. Both boroughs were included in the earthquake area of last year's municipal elections, and in Mount Eden the effect of the upheaval was complete, for a whole opposition "ticket" was elected. Both councils, like local bodies everywhere, have found the intervening period full of difficulty, and in Mount Eden the position has been particularly embarrassing because the new council was elected on its criticism of the old council's [finance, ydt the new council felt obliged to suspend sinking fund payments, and the Mayor holds that a 5/ rate will be necessary. In these circumstances it is not surprising that the invitation of the City Council to come into the Greater Auckland area should receive some support—how much we will not know till to-morrow —in both these boroughs. Many residents must be attracted by the idea of transferring their districts' burdens and problems to the much broader shoulders of Greater Auckland. It seems an easy way out of difficulties. This has always been the governing factor in the consent given by outside areas to amalgamation proposals. They joined the city mainly to improve their position; if the city chose to take over their liabilities, present and to come, it "was the city's business. By a strange anomaly in the law the consent of the people of the invited areas is required, but the ratepayer of the inviting body is not consulted.

It should also be noted that in the case of Mount Eden and Mount Albert, the invitation arose out of the old dispute about water, a matter in which the City Council has never been as sensitive as it should have been to subui'ban opinion. These bodies asked for a reduction in charges, and as a counter proposal the City Council put forward amalgamation. But the question of extending the boundaries of Greater Auckland should bo decided on broader grounds than this. The ideal solution would be a complete regrouping of administrative districts. As things are, the city boundaries go out into the country, but there are other municipal areas much closer to the centre, and in these areas there is no uniformity of size or wealth. In this particular case the special objections to taking in the Tamaki and Point Chevalier areas do not arise, for both Mount Eden and Mount Albert are well-developed urban districts, and Mount Eden is one of the richest and most progressive suburban boroughs in the Dominion. Besides, rate questions are not really as important as some controversialists believe them to be. In the long run there probably would not be much difference between the rating of Mount Eden and the city. The question should be settled on wider grounds than whether an individual ratepayer pays more or less. It should be decided on such considerations as centralisation and decentralisation, the encouragement of local interest in politics, efficiency in administration, and cooperation for the general good.

It comes down to a balance between extremes. The ideal of a Greater Auckland is very attractive, but it should be kept within reasonable Realised in moderation, it should reduce administrative costs, extinguish petty jealousies, encourage a broad civic spirit and facilitate city improvement on a large scale. But if the boundaries are extended too far the central control is weakened and local interest is killed, and one of the main objects of local government is to keep such interest alive. We have published recently some impressive evidence from other countries to show that the policy of amalgamation can be overdone, that experience has proved that certain matters of purely local concern are best left in the hands of relatively small communities. It may be that New Zealand ■will in time evolve a policy of local government on the lines of the proposed metropolitan board; common liabilities will be managed by one central body, and local affairs will bo left to district councils. If so, a good many steps will have to be retraced.