SUMNER COUNCIL CRITICISED

Press, Volume LXXV, Issue 22768, 21 July 1939, Page 7

SUMNER COUNCIL CRITICISED

MOTION OF CENSURE DEFERRED DISCUSSION BY REDCLIFFS BURGESSES Criticism of the Sumner Borough Council was freely expressed at a meeting of the Redcliffs Burgesses’ Association last evening. A motion of censure of the council, however, was thought rather drastic by some of the other members, and it was finally decided to hold the motion over for discussion until the next monthly meeting. Mr H. G. Hunt presided over a large attendance. > In the earlier part of the meeting in a long discussion on a report of the previous meeting whicn had been supplied to another newspaper by Mr F. H. Hamilton, criticism was levelled against Messrs I. J. Wilson and F. TEldridge, who are members of tne Sumner Borough Council as well as members of the association, and Mr C G. B'urgess, a member of the as-

sociation. ■ . Mr Hamilton said that his report was a correct one and the chairman said that he thought that Mr Hamilton’s report was borne out by the minutes as confirmed. . Mr Hamilton took exception to the action of Messrs Wilson, Eldridge, and Burgess in having publicly condemned his report before the confirmation of the minutes of the meeting. Criticism of the council followed a motion by Mr C. A. Smith asking the council for a copy of its 1938-39

balance sheet and its estimates and contemplated works for the coming year. He expressed the opinion that the council’s letter stating that an •explanation of the rise in rates would be posted to each ratepayer with the rate demand was indecisive. To-find what had been done out of the rates would need a magnifying glass, he said, while work done under Scheme 13 was clearly evident. Mr F. H. Hamilton said that it was “pretty rough” that the council should find itself behind and then hand the burden on to the ratepayers. Mr A. F. Roberts said that a councillor had told him that the council knew it was slipping back, but what could it do, he was asked, other than to sack the men. Mr H. G. Hunt said that Cr. F. T. Eldridge had told him that the council had called a halt last November. Apparently it had not done so soon enough. - Mr F. H. Hamilton moved that the question be discussed when the statement had been received from the council.

Affairs of the Borough The chairman said that he had been approached by several ratepayers to convene a meeting to go into the affairs of the borough, but he had definitely declined to do „so. He had told them that this was quite outside the functions of the association. Mr C. A. Smith moved and Mr F. H. Hamilton seconded the following motion: —"That a vote of censure be moved on the Sumner 'Borough Council and Messrs Eldridge,' Wilson, and Burgess for making public statements contrary to the unanimous decision of the Redcliffs’ Burgesses’ Association embodied in Mr Hamilton’s motion, such statements being contrary to the best interests of their district and the Sumner Borough as a whole; furthermore, that their actions have no foundation in fact, are opposed to the principle of fair play, the right of free speech, and the right to criticise, which are the traditional heritage of everyone of us in this democratic country.’’

Mr Hamilton said that he supported the motion because he considered that an attempt had been made to muzzle ■ the members and that the individuals named in the motion had not acted in the best interests of members. He resented the council’s attitude and fully endorsed the motion. , A member; Did we not accept Mr Burgess’s explanation? Mr Hunt: We have confirmed the minutes. Mr E. J. Ebert: We should givf serious thought to a motion like this. We have reporters here and it may make a sorry story. Mr Ebert said that old members of the association would remember that although they had locked horns with the council on occasions previously the association had received all it desired when at peace with the council. The motion was a strong one and might get the association into trouble. Mr H. Nettleton: One councillor told.me that our previous meeting, had done a lot of good. He had been able to get more information from the council than he had received for a long time. '• Mr Ebert moved and Mr Hindle seconded that consideration of the motion be, deferred until the next meeting. This was carried by 16 votes to 3.