REINSTATED.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 137, 13 June 1933, Page 11

REINSTATED.

five employees.

ONEHUNGA COUNCIL DECISION

SINKING EUND PAYMENT .■' DEFERRED. . ,

Onehunga Council Chamber was crowded with men last night when the Borough Council considered a motion to reinstate five .members of the outside staff, whose services were recently dispensed with.

Mr. J. Craig , moved to rescihd the resolution dismissing the men, and to defer .for 12 months, or more, as the council should-think fit, the payment of £1000 to a sinking -fund. His motion was carried by seven votes to three. Mr. Craig said tliat it had been agreed that the saving'in, wages, £925, should be credited jto the.-'streets account, also £1000 from- the Mount # Koskill water account. .In opposing dismissal of these men, he ; had suggested fti committee t"hat the proposed payment of £2000 towards the Mount Roskill waterworks loan should bo deferred for a period. 'That was objected to on the ground that the interest on that loan would be a continual burden on the rates,. yet immediately after dismissal of the men it was agreed to defer £1000 of the Mount Koskill loan and use the money for streets. Effects of Dismissal. The dismissal of the m6n would not only, mean that they would be unable to pay .their rates, but they would be unable to circulate money, ,«nd so it would become more difficult" for every business man to carry on and pay his riites. The only way to get -in the £13,000 of. outstanding rate' arrears was to revive industrial activity in the borough by increasing the spending Eower of the people. They could not uild up a prosperous borough by impoverishing people by throwing them out of work. The discharge of the men was not helpful, but the reverse, to the interests of the solvent ratepayers. If the spending power of the community were increased by a progressive policy of development, and men were put in a position where they could pay their rates, the borough would bo able to collect arrears and then rates could be reduced. „

Mr. Craig said the Unemployment Board was against using the unemployed labourers as gangers and overseers. The men discharged were. all tried and efficient servants of the borough. In the dismissal notice it was stated that "this step is due not to any dissatisfaction with your work, which has always been satisfactory." Mr. Craig agreed, at the suggestion of the Mayor, Mr. E. Morton, to add to his resolution, "and to review the estimates."

■Mr. M. J. Moore, "who seconded the motion, said the dismissal of five permanent hands would create a bad impression in the town if it were known that this had been done to save £925.

Motion Opposed. Mr. S. Vella opposed the motion. The resolution to discharge the men had been carried in committee, he said, by 8 to 2, after a fortnight's consideration. He felt it a painful thing to dismiss old and tried, servants, but they had to balance their budget to protect the ratepayers. Following Mr. Craig's argument to its logical conclusion the council should put on 20 or 30 more men, and so absorb all the revenue. There were COO relief woflcers in Onehunga, many of whom were ratepayers who were putting 1/ a week aside to pay their rates. Some of the dismissed men were, in a good financial position, and others could get the old age pension. If the council allowed ratepayers to work out theijr rates half of them would want to do 60. " Mr. G. E. Haydon favoured retaining these five men "and discharging others less efficient. » Mr. A.'A. Coates argued that circumstances had changed since the resolution was adopted s. fortnight ago- The council now proposed to raise another loan, and that would find work for more men. He found that the payment of £007 to one sinking fund could well be suspended for-one year. The dismissals would not be effective until the end of July, therefore,: instead of saving £925, they could only save £045. Mr. A. C. Tonkin said the council had paid over £2000 last year for labour, and £1600 for material. He was compelled to vote against the motion. Mr. T. J. Pardington favoured Mr. Vella's suggestion of, employing more men, then business would improve. "A Matter of Finance." The Mayor," Mr. E. Morton, said it was purely a matter of finance. The council must conserve the rates. 'He would not support the suspension or sinking -fund accounts. That would be repudiation, and it would mean that tlie Loans Board ' would certainly not sanction any. more loans. Last year they had £5000 for street maintenance, and £3500 went in labour, and £1500 for material. 'How could the council expect to carry on with only £30 a week for the streets ? ' * ■ i

The motion was carried by .seven votes to three, as follows:—For: Messrs. J. Craig, T. J. Partington, G. E. Haydon, M. J. Moore, W. C. Bailey, A.-A. Coates and F. Gilchrist. Against: The Mayor and Messrs. S. Vella and A. U Tonkin.