MERGER-IN CITY.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 289, 7 December 1933, Page 10

MERGER-IN CITY.

PROPOSAL RENEWED. NEWMARKET, MT. ALBERT, I. MT. EDEN. ; MR. HUTCHISON'S ADVOCACY. (By Telegrapli.—Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, this day. Tile, merging in Auckland city of the I borough.* of Mount Albert, Mount Eden and Newmarket, as a solution not only i of water supply differences but as. a jj mean? of providing economical administration in all municipal activities, was advocated by the Mayor of Auckland, Mr. G. W. Hutchison, when appearing yesterday afternoon before the Select Committee on the Waikato Water Supply Company, Limited, Empowering Bill.

"if the local bodies desire to participate in the control and obtain lower prices for water they can achieve that objective by amalgamation with the city," said the Mayor, who explained

that after his assumption of office he had examined ths entire question with an open mind, and had come to the conclusion that amalgamation was desirable. After consultation with local body representatives he had drawn up terms of an amalgamation and they had been considered by his council, which, however, did not adopt them in toto. Eventually amalgamation terms were submitted by the council to the local bodies. "I am satisfied," he added, "that my conclusion, reached with an entirely free mind, was the correct one, and I adhere to it. Mount Albert, Mount Eden and Newmarket should amalgamate withrthe city, and under such a merger the whole of the municipal services could be more economically carried out."

Mr. H. M. Rogerson, counsel for suburban local bodies supporting the bill, •objected to a discussion on the merits and demerits of amalgamation sinoe none of his witnesses was present.

The Chairman, Mr. S. G. Smith, noted the objection.

Economy Aim,

Mr. Hutchison said he had merely anticipated a question by Mr. Rogerson on his preference for a water board or the company's proposal. Geographically, Mount Albert and Mount Eden were in the city limit, and Newmarket was surrounded by the city. From every point of view economy could be exercised by joint administration -for the whole of the municipal activities. "I contend that the establishment of a water board would be only part of the remedy that could be applied to municipal matters in Auckland," said tne Mayor. "Its creation would postpone, possibly indefinitely, other benefits that would accrue from amalgamation,, which is a question that will be ogam considered at no distant date. There appears to be no justification for Newmarket's remaining outside the city boundary. It ha* been one of,th* prime movers in the agitation against the city. It was the Mayor of ■ Newmarket convened the conference **/* «?*£* «£ committee-which appeared before this Committee to support the tall. . . Mr. Rogerson: I understand that that is quite wrong. ■ The Mayor: Newmarket would not tike a poll. It has 635 ratepayers and fITO ratable properties. The .only means of effecting amalgamation-in the case of Newmarket is by legislation. JTho Citv Council will not consider a water board until Newmarket is brought in. It should have come in long ago.

Avenue to Control.

The Mayor contended that a water hoard would not-reduce the cost.of water hut would prohahly tend to increase it. . If the local bodies wished to ioin in.*he control "of'water, the city was willing that they should join in the control of the whole of the city activities. Be was still prepared to restate the amalgamation proposal, lftc principle of private enterprise for a public utility was so serious that lie did not want a red herring in the shape of a water hoard proposal drawn across the scent. As the matter had gone so far, he considered Parliament should he given an opportunity to decide now for all time whether private enterprise should- he permitted to take over such a utility. "We would like the decision of Parliament," said Mr. Hutchison, "because if the proposal, in the hill is approved we Will have a crop of private: companies prepared to undertake this and similar utilities."

Amalgamation ~ , In reply to Mr. R. Semple, a member of the'committee, the Mayor said that Mount Albert, Mount Eden, and Newmarket would he the limit -of the amalgamations '■ With '- the ' city.' There could be separate amalgamations among the other outside local bodies. If amalgamation took plac<s between the city and Newmarket, Mount Eden, and Mount Albert, his objection to the creation of a' water board for the whole area, including the North Shore boroughs,: would be removed, there were impor-, tant reasons why the water: hoard; should not be established while the three local bodies mentioned were separated.

Mr. W. A. Bodkin: The City. Council would rather hold this question as a lever to force amalgamation?

Mr. Hutchison: We have not raised this matter.

In answer to other questions, the Mayor said that irritation over the water problem would continue unle* something along the lines he had suggested were vadopted. Difficulties could be overcome by the voluntary fixation of prices by- arbitration. There was no question of extending the amalgamation offer to New Lynn, which, incidentally, owed the" city £1000 on account of water, and showed its gratitude by supporting the bill. There would be no intention either of taking in the North Shore boroughs.

Mr. P. Fraser: Would consolidation and unification of a service such as water be a step forward to amalgamation? , .1 •

The Mayor: No, it would postpone it indefinitely. . v ■ ..-•••

Mr. Fraser': Don't you think it is possible for the City Council and the local bodies to agree upon some scheme which the people will feel is fair and just? " No Dragooning." "I think it is possible," replied the Mayor, "but as far as I am concerned I will not bargain with the local bodies for a water ' board merely because we are threatened by private enterprise. I would far sooner that the House granted the. company the franchise than be dragooned by the threat of a private being allowed to operate."

Mr. Fraser: If the water board were agreed to, the city would be throwing away one of the most powerful instruments in endeavouring to persuade the three local bodies to amalgamate?

The Mayor: That is not my view. I look upon it with an open mind, dispassionately, and with a certain amount of expert knowledge. I contend amalgamation would make for the most economical administration. Future Discussions. Mr. Eraser: I agree thoroughly. But there is still the difficulty of the water. If the bill were disposed of, would the council be willing to participate in negotiations to solve the water problem? The Mayor: Yes, we are on the friendliest terms with the local bodies, and there is no reason why we should not enter into further discussions. Mr. E. H. Northeroft (counsel for the company): You are denying to other local bodies the advantages of a water board because three local bodies will not agree to amalgamation? The Mayor: I don't think the others are sufficiently important to worry about—their supplies are negligible. Mr. Northeroft: Ls there not a feeling in' Auckland that the City Council is pursuing a policy of amalgamation to absurd lengths?

The Mayor: I would not say that,