COST OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20907, 14 July 1933, Page 10

COST OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

♦ NEED FOR REVISION. DR. E. P. NEALE'S ANALYSIS OF THE POSITION. An analysis of the faults of local government in New Zealand was made by Dr. E. P. Neale, secretary of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce, in an address to the Auckland branch of the Economic Society of Australia and New Zealand this week. In March, 1933, said Dr. Neale, 681 local authorities were functioning in New Zealand, as follows:—County councils, 125; borough councils, 122; independent town boards, 40; dependent town boards, 27; road boards, 13; river boards, 42; land drainage boards, 57; urban drainage boards, 3; water supply boards, 3; fire boards, 58; local railways board, 1; harbour boards, 45; electricpower boards, 39; hospital boards, 45; tramway, etc., boards, 2; gas lighting board, 1; rabbit boards, 53. In addition, there were 18 district councils under the Main Highways Board and between 50 and 60 local educational authorities.

A Comparison

"To administer the local affairs of a population equivalent to that of Glasgow or Birmingham we have 681 local bodies with elected and nominated memberships of between 5000 and 6000," continued Dr. Neale. "Their professional and clerical staffs number 3650—an increase of 50 per cent, in the last 10 years—and total staffs of 45,402, with an annual wages and salary bill of £6,500,000. All these bodies have borrowing powers and direct or indirect rating powers. "I have been told that it is possible for the same property to be separately rated by nine different authorities. In the whole of Australia, with nearly nine times our population, there are not more than 1100 local authorities to our 700." One of the most serious obstacles to reform in this matter was a false sense of local pride, which tended to prevent the merging of bodies whose separate existence was no longer justified. The need for amalgamation was particularly great among the smaller counties owing to the revolution in road transport.

Staff Specialisation. Southiunu county, on tne other huiiu, uuuipriaeu <wuU square nines, i *<-*> county eriyiaeer could viait me lurtuest corner oi u ana return co nio omee wjuiui a ttay. i\. larger area permuttu a greater degree ox stau i>peeiausation, mure economical empio^mem oi SLaii anu equipment, ana luuny other economies ox largeotaie upti/aLion.

l)i\ iieaie quoted a statement by Mr j. Vv. tviawoon, lormerly Director or Town Planning, to the eifect tnat, naving regard to lopograpny and present means of transportation, i\ew Zeaianu lell nacuiany into 23 districts, eacn oi wincn was for all practical purposes a sell-contained social and economic unit. The average area oi these districts was just under 4000 square miles.

Mr Mawson considered that it would be excellent if in each district a regional committee, representing all interests, could be set up to discuss all matters of common concern. He was sure that if such committees had before them information relating to the past, present, and potential development of their districts, they would of their own initiative put forward recommendations for the reorganisation of local government- Whether they did so or not, they would at least be able to frame co-ordinated plans of development. Increased Indebtedness. Another fault of the present local government system was the facility it had given for piling up public debt, said Dr. Neale. In the 10 years from 1919 to 1929 the gross indebtedness of New Zealand local bodies multiplied two and a half times, namely, from £23,000,000 to £69,000,000. The annual loan charges rose from 26s to 59s per capita, and the figure was now 64s 4d. To some extent the development of hydro-electricity and the "motorisation'' of transport provided an excuse for the increase, but trie figures were staggering enough to raise a prima-facie presumption of undue extravagance. The speaker praised the work of the Local Government Loans Board in checking unwise expenditure since its creation some years ago. A further point of criticism was the poor average level of administrative and general ability among local body members, especiallv those sitting upon the smaller bodies. It seemed to be assumed by the public that no snecial training whatever was needed for the difficult task of local government. It had been said that in eeneral local body members to-dav were selected and elected by default—the default of the responsible representatives of business, industrial. and financial ho"°os to take an active part in civic affairs.