‘Commercial Buildings Outside Scope’

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31178, 30 September 1966, Page 1

‘Commercial Buildings Outside Scope’

(N.Z. Pres* Association*

WELLINGTON, Sept 29. The Opposition once again clashed with the Government over the principle of giving a local body rights to | erect commercial build- : ings—and failed in a bid to reinstate some of the provisions deleted from the Levin Borough Empowering Bill. Opposition members began their attack during a second reading debate in Parliament on September 1. They criticised Government members on the Local Bills Committee for dropping the clauses which would have given the Levin Borough Council power

[to erect commercial buildings. Government members argued that a local body’s correct functions were to look [after amenities and provide [services for the community, [rather than set itself up in 'competition with private enterprise in any line it wished. When the bill was being considered in committee last week, Mr R. L. Bailey (Opp., Heretaunga) moved an amendment which would reinstate some of the deleted provisions. Today the Opposition called a division on the amendment, which was lost by 33 to 27. During today’s debate, Mr Bailey said that giving the Levin Borough Council power to build for commercial purposes would mean it had extra revenue in the future — possibly leading to a reduction of rates. “If this House refuses to reinsert these clauses with the amendment, we will be doing a disservice to the council.” He said his amendment stipulated that the council

should only develop land which private residents did not need for building. He had inserted the provision of a six months time limit for a party to develop the land from the date it was acquired, thus avoiding the risk of speculation by some interests which might buy land to sell later at a profit. Mr A. McCready (Govt., Otaki), who introduced the bill, said he had conferred last week-end with the Levin councillors. They assured him they were happy that the measure should proceed as amended by the Local Bills Committee. The council had realised the full implications of the clauses and did not want to have anything to do with them, said Mr McCready. Mr Bailey said he was surprised because he maintained councillors had a duty to ensure legislation was in the interests of their district.

“One would have thought that these responsible members of the community would have been fully aware of what

they were doing when they asked for these amendments,” said Mr Bailey. Mr J. H. George (Govt.. Otago Central) said the amendment was worthless. Mr McCready and the Levin councillors were completely satisfied. “They don’t need the amendment to help them or tell them what to do.” The Deputy-Leader of the Opposition (Mr Watt) said Mr Bailey’s amendment only restored to some extent the position existing when Mr McCready introduced the bill. He asked when Mr McCready had changed his mind, was it at the Government caucus? “Nothing changed my mind,” said Mr McCready. “I informed the Levin Borough Council I did not support clause five and did not think it could get through. “My duty as a member for the district was to present the bill as it had been submitted. I am quite happy with this bill because I have been told by the people concerned that they are happy.” The bill was committed.