No Agreement In Talks (hi Merger Of Counties

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28823, 18 February 1959, Page 18

No Agreement In Talks (hi Merger Of Counties

f' . Talks between representatives of the, Paparua County .Cotmeal and the Springs County Council and the Local Government Commission ended in a deadlock late yesterday afternoon, after day-long discussions On opposing proposals. Paparuh suggested a merger of the two codnties and Springs proposed boundary alterations on behalf of six petitioners seeking, the inclusion in Springs County of a block of land now in Paparua.

Both councils had separate meetings with the commission, comprised of Mr A. A. McLauchlan, chairman, Mr N. H. Moss, municipal nominee, and Mr W. A. Lee, rural nominee, and then a joint meeting was held. Mr D. Ryan, one of the petitioners, told the Springs County's meeting with the commission that when the proposal to amalgamate rural areas .into a new Lincoln county was rejected ‘‘we decided it was time to see if we could get out of Paparua. , “We- are a rural riding, yet there are more people in Templeton and they can out-vote us any time they like,’'.he said. “We discussed the matter with all the residents in the block, talking to Mr Lockhead, the riding member, first. They were all dead keen to sign the petition, except Mr Lockhead."

He said that the chief reasons for seeking the boundary changes were not land tax or rates, but simply that the petitioners were a rural people with rural Interests and had "nothing to gain from the Hornby or Islington townships.’’

Township Funds The Springs County Council’s chairman (Mr E. J. Stalker) said Paparua’s system of county townships built up townships which retained their own funds. The funds were not available to rural people, although they helped to build up the funds.

Urban areas that were overflows from Christchurch built up valuatiohs and voting and this meant the rural people had little say, Mr Stalker said. Mr Lee said representation was largely in the hands of the local authority itself. Counties could administer both types of settlement.

Mr M. J. Ryan, of the Springs County Council, said the Paparua council's proposal for amalgamation rather than a boundary change was "a waste of time.” The Springs County Council was still in favour of a rural county. "Springs has been put on the defensive all the time, but out of all this will emerge a strong rural ■ county. I like many other men in the room, am getting more sure of it every day,” he said. Second Meeting At the first meeting of the afternoon, Mr McLachlan told the Paparua County Council representatives that the Springs County Council had slightly altered its attitude to the rectification of the counties. ‘‘They feared combination with too many urban regions,” he said. "They said it was distasteful to them. I had thought that with the up-to-date concept of county towns —in the light of the 60 or 70 that are functioning well—there was no reason why farmers could not be left without any fear of the urban population.’’ He Said county town legislation was well conceived and a great godsend to the country. It went 190 per cent, of the way towards finding a solution to the problem of semi-urban areas. Mr McLachlan said he was ashamed that the Springs County Council should be apprehensive of “the. dreadful, threatening in-: vasion from the urban areas.” He was vexed at the situation that seemed to have developed. "It is a pity; just because there are a few thousand persons in Hornby and Sockburn. “We are no nearer a straightout merger than we were five or 10 years ago,” he said. Mr Lee said it was still in the commission’s power to reopen the question of a Lincoln county. New System Needed The system of local Government, which was 50 years old, must be reorganised to meet present-day conditions, Mr Lee said. He thought the Springs county was prepared to negotiate, but not on the lines suggested by the Paparua County Council, consequently the commission had to find out what could be done in the interests of all; The chairman of Paparua County Council (Mr J. H. Weaver) said he could reassure the commission that "the door into Paparua, as far as the Springs County is concerned, is as wide open as it is possible to make it.” He said that some little time ago a petition was circulated in the county asking for a small part of the county' to be merged in the Springs county. “Rumour had it at that time that this was the thin end of the wedge, and that if the expected result eventuated it would have far-reaching effects.” Mr Weaver said the minor petition resulted in Paparua County Council reviewing the situation, and last September it had been decided to ask the commission to prepare a scheme' to include the whole of the Springs county within the boundaries of Paparua. “It is well known that certain influential members of the Springs council are somewhat opposed to . this proposal, contending that Paparua contains too large an urban area,” Mr Weaver said. “It is no secret that an imaginary barrier between rural and urban interests is' being built up and emphasised with a view to dissuading the electors of Springs from joining Paparua. Door Wide Open

“I would again emphasise that the door is wide open, and assure Springs county electors that if they choose to avail themselves of a knowledge of the workings of Paparua they will be given every opportunity to do so. “They will find that Paparua and its staff are as wide awake as any council and that the county administration is geared to serve its ratepayers as speedily and economically as most,” he added. Springs County Council representatives then joined the meeting. The commission’s secretary (Mr R. Buist) again outlined the issues and said the procedure was for the commission to hold a formal meeting between the two counties to discuss the position. Mr Weaver said he was sure that every, member of Paparua County Council strongly objected to the “chiselling” of any part of the county. lb Stalker Mid the Springs

County Council had simply received the petition and the county was following normal procedure. He said the petitioners felt they had more common interests in the Springs County than in Paparua. He was a little disappointed that Paparua’s plans had been carried to such a stage without discussion between the two bounties.

Ml- Weaver denied that Paparua did not wish to discuss the question with the Springs County Council. He had twice made approaches, through a member of the Springs County Council, but had twice been told: “Mr Stalker is too busy.” Mr Weaver suggested that informal talks be held by himself and his, deputy-chairman with the chairman and deputy-chair-man of the Springs County Council. ' Mr McLachlan said he hoped the two counties would consider that, and the meeting was then closed.