EAST v. WEST

Press, Volume LII, Issue 15767, 7 December 1916, Page 9

EAST v. WEST

•SPKEYDON

A CHANGE WANTED

At a recent meeting of the Spreydon Borough Council, a report from a special committee appointed to consider the form of representation under which the forthcoming election of councillors should be conducted, reported that the best interests of tho borough would be served by the institution of a special system allowing all th c ratepayers to vote for four representatives in each ward. Tho question was referred to thc Municipal Association's solicitor (Mr T. F. Martin), whoso answer was received last night. It stated that it was not possible to hold thc election in the manner proposed.

In. reply to a question, tho Mayor suited that the only way to bring the scheme into forc c was by means of special legislation. Cr. O'itourke then moved in tho manner suggested. He stated that they were ail tired of the constant friction between tho East and West Wards. What they wanted was to got tho eight best men" they could, and tho best thing to do was to adopt tho special scheme introduced by the committee. The motion was seconded, and ,provoked considerable discussion.

Cr. Manhiro moved as an amendment: ''That tho system at present in force b c abolished." Cr. Rudd seconded tho amendment pro forma. Cr. "Williamson spoke in favour of proportional representation, ' stating that in view of the most unjust treats inent accorded to his ward that system should be introduced. Ho accused tho Council of favouring the East "Ward. On his "Worship interjecting a reply to one of his statements, Cr, Williamson accused th e Mayor of trying to muzzle him.

The Mayor: I am not muzzling you. Cr. Williamson: You arc always interrupting ■' me, and will not give me fair play. My ward has been most unfairly treated'. It has representatives who do not represent it. Proportional representation would do much to abolish the present unfair system in the Council. The Mayor has consistently refused to grant me fair treatment. The Mayor ordered Cr. Williamson to withdraw th«> statement. Cr. Manhire's amendment was lost. Cr. Williamson then mox*ed as an amendment: "That the ward system bo abolished, ana that separate accounts be kept of the various wards." Several members: How can you keep .ward accounts when you would abolish tho wards? Cr. Williamson: You can keep the accounts of the wards when you abolish them. (More laughter.) Christchurch city kept separate accounts of the borough of St. Albans for some time. The Mayor: What was your motion, Cr. Williamson? Cr. Williamson: That we adopt proportional representation, and that separate accounts of the wards be kept. The Mayor and members: That was not your motion. Cr. Williamson: It was. The Mayor: Let him alter itj let us hear it. Members: The amendment is not seconded. Tho Mayor : Let it go. Cr. Taylor opposed proportional representation. He did not agreo with tho claim that th*. result would be that the best eight men would bo elected. It might mean the reverse. Cr. Manhiro said the on^.v place where there was the dissatisfaction complained of by Cr. Williamson was in Cr. Williamson's own ward, and there v ith Cr. Williamson himself. Other councillors stated that the only dissatisfaction that existed existed in regard to Cr. Williamson. The Spreydon Borough Council had been made a bear garden, and men who could do good work would not offer themselves for election. Cr. Williamson's amendment was not seconded, and lapsed. . Cr. Williamson then rose and made a fervent appeal for the right to reply. Tho Mayor: Sit down. Cr. Williamson: I must reply. After a heated discussion between the •Mayor and Cr. Williamson, the latter yielded and sat down. Cr. O'Rourke's motion was carried, and the episode ended.