DISPOSAL OF REFUSE

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22111, 5 June 1937, Page 19

DISPOSAL OF REFUSE

* DUMPING PROPOSAL OPPOSED CITY COUNCILLOR’S CRITICISM Allegations that the recent epidemic of infantile paralysis was caused by the dumping of refuse by the Dunedin City Council were made at a recent meeting of the North Linwood Burgesses’ Association by the president, Mr T. H. Butterfield, who is also a member of the Christchurch City Council. Mr Butterfield said that he had published data on the point, and that data had never been refuted by the Dunedin Council. He said he strongly objected to the proposed demolition of the destructor by the Christchurch City Council and had been the only member of the council to oppose it. He would support any motion for its removal to another site, but would never agree to its abolition and the dumping of the refuse. For health reasons burning was the only safe method of disposal, but if the people in the city wanted the destructor removed he would assist. He did not object to the dumps being used for, dry refuse, and eventually turned into parks, but if the destructor were abolished what would the council do when the present proposed dumps were filled? Even if they made use of the site at Chaneys for a time there would always be a constantly recurring problem of finding areas for the refuse. Several other members of the association supported the president’s remarks.

It was finally decided to send a letter of protest to the Christchurch City Council objecting to “the rubbish aumps that are being established in the suburbs of Christchurch.” A motion was also passed supporting the Spreydon Burgesses “in their endeavour to rid their district of a grave menace,”