CITY COUNCIL COSTS

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21314, 6 November 1934, Page 10

CITY COUNCIL COSTS

.* KEEN PARTY DEBATE SUGGESTED PUBLIC ENQUIRY MISUSE OF COUNCIL CAR ALLEGED Party differences were aired in an unusually keen and outspoken debate at the meeting of the Christchurch City Council last evening. Councillors were discussing a suggestion for a public enquiry into the administrative costs of the city, and representatives of the Citizens' Association m:.!e the subject an opportunity for frank criticism of the Labour party's policy on the council. The attack became particularly keen when in the general criticism of recent actions an allegation was made involving the use of either the Mayor's car or a council car on business other than that of the city. The allegation was admitted, but Labour councillors 'strongly protested against any suggestion of maladministration in the council's affairs. Eventually, after councillors had engaged in one of the keenest party debates for years, the motion for a public enquiry was lost by only one vote.

The discussion arose from the following resolution proposed by Cr. A. E. Armstrong:—

''That a general public enquiry be set up for the" purpose of deciding whether the ratepayers' money is being spent in the most economical manner, and to allow of any citizen to enquire into any detail of council administration."

Cr. Armstrong said that he considered economics could be made in civic administration amounting to thousands of pounds. He concentrated his criticism on the salaries of the council's principal officers. Ho said there were 64 officers receiving from £() to £24 10s a week.

His motion was seconded by Cr. E. H. Andrews, who said that he thought there "-as a possibility of economies being made. He regretted that Cr. Armstrong had not made any more concrete proposal for the order of reference of the suggested enquiry. He hoped other councillors would suggest the lines any enquiry should follow. Sweeping criticism of recent administration was made by Cr. T. Milliken, who supported the motion. He claimed that there was room for general improvement in administration. He said that it was probable that economies could be made by reducing the engineering staff. He regretted that in consideration of a tender for coal to the Municipal Electricity Department recently the second lowest tender was accepted rather than tin lowest on the grounds that the lowest tenderer was a firm which did not pay as high wages as that submitting the tender ultimately accepted. Actually, the grounds were not supported by fact. It could be proved that actually the wages paid by the lowest tenderer were as good if not higher than those paid by the successful tenderer. He alsi claimed that there had not been any serious -""mpt to reduce rate.-. Question About Car Continuing, Cr. Milliken said that he wished to know whero the Mayor's car was on the day following the last meeting of the council. He mentioned the decision of the London Labour parly agreeing with the principle that relatives or • near relatives of councillors should not be employed by the councils on which these councillors acted, and said that that subject was one which might well be investigated. The Christchurch City Council, too, he claimed, had created a privileged class by its policy of not imposing the wage cuts on its employees. Other questions he wished investigated were the position of the city'i workers' dwellings scheme, and whether it was true that when council employees were placed on jobs they were approached and asked to contribute to the funds of the Labour party. Cr. J. Mathison accused the supporters of the motion of basing a case on general allegations and innuendo which did not justify an enquiry. Because of the municipal election next year the criticism had political significance. That was why Cr. Armstrong was receiving the support of the Citizens' Association representatives. The criticism was designed tp hurt the Labour party and its civic administration. Cr. J. S. Barnett said that Cr. Milliken had introduced subjects which had been decided. Also, Cr. Milliken had opportunity as a member of the committee of the council to discuss the tender for coal. Cr. Hayward: He was in the minority. Cr. Barnett (continuing): When Cr. Milliken mentioned the Mayoral motor-car he sinks to the lowest depths of shabbincss. The Mayof was in Christchurch on the day mentioned but is not here now.

The Deputy-Mayor: Cr. Milliken would not have mentioned it if he had been here now.

Cr. Milliken: I made no insinuation against the Mayor. Cr. Barnett: I am surprised that a man of Cr. Milliken's mental calibre should descend to such a mean suggestion as that concerning the motor-car.

"I think Cr. Milliken .dmuid k* censured," said Cr. G. T. Thurston. "Speaking of the tender for coal, I am glad that the council acted as it did. The lowest tenderer represents an enemv of working men. Cr Milliken's statement can be disproved."

Cr. Thurston described Cr. Milliken's reference to the use of the Mayoral motor-car as "a most shabby action." Continuing he added: "Cr. Milliken's mention of the employment of the relatives and near relatives of councillors i* a dirty insinuation against me. If I

had my way my daughter would not be employed by this council, and I doubt whether she will be so employed much longer. I had looked upon Cr. Milliken as a friend, but in future I must look upon him as an enemy. I will know how to handle him in future." Cr. W. Hay ward: I regret the turn the debate has taken. Cr. Thurston: I don't. I am enjoying it. Car for Cr. Thurston Cr. Hay ward: I want to defend Cr. Milliken. He was quite right in mentioning the Mayoral motor-car. [ will place before the council the facts of a rumour current in the city. It will give Cr. Thurston an opportunity to refute it if he is able. At the last meeting of the council the decision to convert and consolidate city loans was reached. It was an important decision, in the making of which it was known by councillors that every vote would count.. It is stated that Cr. Thurston wished to be at Timaru on the day following the council meeting and had intended leaving on the train before the meeting. He was induced to remain for the meeting, and the Mayoral motor-car or some motorcar of the council took Cr. Thurston to Timaru on the day following the council meeting at the council's expense. That motor-car waited for Cr- Thurston's return.

Cr. Thurston replied that it was true that he had been taken to and from Timaru at the council's expense in a council motor-car as alleged. He had insisted on that arrangement when he agreed to stay for the meeting. Cr. Mathison: I hope we are to have further opportunity for dirty washing. I have many insinuations I could introduce.

Cr. M. E. Lyons: If the Labour party has anything to hide, well you can hide it if you wish. But are we doing our duty as cheaply and as efficiently as we could? A councillor: Can you suggest a tribunal?

Cr. Lyons: Yes, I can. I could suggest a tribunal consisting of Professor Tocker and two public accountants.

Cr. Armstrong: What about Professor Shelley? Cr. J. S. Barnetl: What about George Lawn? Would he do?

An Unwarped Judgment

Cr. Lyons: Yes, I think he would. I think Mr Lawn could be relied on not to allow his judgment to be warped by political opinion. Cr. Lyons said that he absolved the Labour party of any blame for the position, because it was acting according to its instructions. Cr. T. Andrews, referring to appointments to the council staff, said that a better system was needed. At the present lime the whole thing was a joke. "This is the first time since I have been here that we have seen such party feeling, and it shows the futility of having parties here at all," said Cr. F. T. Evans, an Independent member of the council. Cr. Evans added that he might have given the motion his serious consideration had Cr. Armstrong brought down some more definite proposal. "Things do grow, and it is quite possible that some item of administration costs will grow, as it were, unconsciously." If the council wanted good men on its staff, it would have to pay for them. It was due to the dignity of the city. Cr. T. H. Buttcrfield: I don't think that there have been any complaints about the City Council rates since I have been on the council. I have heard just the reverse on hundreds of occasions. Jf the city wants the services it has to-day it must pay for them. Every enquiry into the council's administration has led to its" being upheld. Speaking about councillors' relatives securing positions on the council staff, Cr. Butterfield said that he believed that a councillor's family had just as much right to the positions as any other human being. The tone of the discussion had not been too good, said Cr. Buttcrfield. He also denied domination of the council by the Trades Hall, to his knowledge. Cr. J. W. Beanland said that whatever party was in power, that party's policy had to be carried out by the council as a whole, if continued disagreement was to be prevented. He agreed that if the city was to maintain a standard of efficiency the council had to pay its officers reasonably. "I think that a great deal of the harsh things said here might have been avoided and the discussion settled amicably," he said.

Cr. Thurston: We did not take the gloves off. E°futing any suggestion of an alliance with the Citizens' Association, Cr. Armstrong said that the association, while jealous of the Labour party having power during the last few years, would not have the moral courage to put into effect the economic policy it had propounded. No party on the council had the courage to do it. The motion was lost by eight votes to seven, the division being as follows: For—Crs. Armstrong. Thacker, Lyons, Milliken, T. Andrews, W. Havward E. H. Andrews. Against—Crs. Butterfield, Barnett, Thurston, Howard, Mathison, Evans, Beanland. and the Deputy-Mayor (Cr. J. X. Archer).