Minister Rebukes Council Over Airport

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29778, 22 March 1962, Page 15

Minister Rebukes Council Over Airport

The City Council and its airport committee have been reproved for proceeding with the Christchurch airport car park ahead of Government approval; but have told the Minister in charge of Civil Aviation (Mr McAlpine) that action was prompted with a desire to get on with a job that had to be done and that it had been frustrated by delays in obtaining decisions to proceed with other urgent work.

An exchange of letters was reported to the council last evening, when the Government’s approval of £11,025 as its half-share of the cost of construction to date of the car park was received.

“Compared with many other airports, Christchurch demands, with the exception of the terminal building, have been very modest, but even in this connexion we are still awaiting the Government’s final payment of £15,000' for a building that has been in use for two years. This situation is quite ludicrous, especially as it is obvious to everybody else that the terminal building is an amenity which has fully justified its existence, is earning profits and has stimulated air travel.” Savings Hie council had always tried to anticipate growth, and considerable savings had been made through that policy. “The unnecessary delays we have suffered have not only been frustrating, but have cost both the council and the Government time and money,” the letter said. The council was still await-

The Minister said he and his Cabinet colleagues had been perturbed to note that the work was begun without specific Government approval of the sharing of costs. “This is not the only instance of this happening at the Christchurch airport,” he said.

The Government had continuous financial negotiation with many local bodies, boards, commissions, etc., and it was essential that its financial obligations be carefully budgeted, the Minister said. That could only be done if prior approval of all commitments was obtained. "It would be appreciated if you would ensure that in future no capital works towards which it is expected that the Government will contribute at some stage are commenced before specific Government approval to the expenditure is obtained,” the Minister said.

“Although technically the work on the car park was commenced without specific Government financial authority, it was not the intention of the council to deliberately commit the Government, as this scheme , had been approved in principle by your department as far back as 1959,” the committee said in reply. The council had adopted the only sensible course, and did not appear to have been given credit for the fact that it had earned for the Government and the council at least £5OOO additional revenue. The department had been fully aware of everything done, and the committee was extremely disappointed that the Minister had written a “disciplinary” letter to the Mayor. “Our action was prompted by the desire to get on with a job that we knew had to be done, and the sooner the better as it was revenueproducing,” the committee said. “Because we had already been frustrated by delays in obtaining decisions to proceed with other urgent work, we knew that if we did not take some positive action this project could be held up indefinitely.