Nomination Not Liked

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31224, 23 November 1966, Page 1

Nomination Not Liked

“It would require cogent arguments to convince most people that a board with such responsibilities should not be directly responsible to its ratepayers,” said a report from the policy committee to the Christchurch Drainage Board last night.

The board decided to oppose a nominated drainage board, and agreed to seek legislation to amend its subdistrict boundaries so as to achieve more equality of representation for elected members on the basis of population and valuation.

Chief points of dissatisfaction with the elected board system appeared to be the imbalance of representation from the sub-districts, the cost of separate elections, and different views held by the territorial local bodies from those of the board, said the policy committee. Legislation would be needed to change the board’s constitution, and this could not be obtained until next year. A nominated board could save as much as £2480 a year in election and roil costs, and it had been asserted that a nominated board would bring the territorial local bodies into closer touch with its work. But, the report continued, the board was responsible for the largest capital develop-

meat programme of any South Island local body, and its loan indebtedness of £6,165,350 compared with a total of £5,918,994 for the six metropolitan territorial councils. The board collected £949,918 in rates, as compared with £1,979,875 for the other six bodies. There could be difficulty in giving direct representation for Haiswell county and Riocarton borough because their populations were respectively 1900 and 7350, while the average population for each board sub-district was 17,358. "There can be a tendency for councils to attempt to direct and influence the judgment of members by resolutions prejudging major points at issue, or to cause delays through members

wishing to get the opinions of their councils,” the report continued. in recent years, more Maison had been developed between the board and the councils. More could be done in providing information, engineering comments, and joint discussions. The board should err, if at all, in giving too much rather than too little information. Board members nominated from their councils would have to be prepared to spend several hours a week on board business. Adopting the report, the board agreed to develop cooperation with the councils, and to seek suggestions as to ways in which the board could help. A sub-committee was set up to make plans for amending legislation.