Committee To Study New Court Plans

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32017, 18 June 1969, Page 10

Committee To Study New Court Plans

The Christchurch Civic Trust on Monday evening accepted an invitation to be represented on a select committee to exchange points of view on the design of the hew Supreme Court buildings being drawn by architects in the Christchurch office of the Ministry of Works. The Canterbury District Law Society has also Invited Mr Justice Macarthur, the senior judge in Christchurch, Mr E. S. J. Crutchley, the senior Christchurch magistrate, and Cr H. G. Hay, chairman of the City Council’s cultural .Committee, to sit on the committee. The Civic Trust appointed its chairman, Mr J. Oakley, as its representative.

It would be in the interests of an early start oh the new courts to form such a committee, said Mr J. E. Millar, president of the Law Society, in a letter to ‘ the trust It was not intended that a corporate view be reached by the committee, but that the committee bring the views of interested parties together to help the Justice Department and the Ministry of Works. The Law Society has already seen the plans in con-

fidence and its ‘ consultant architect, Mr F, M. Warren, has studied them. But the Civic Trust has been told by the Justice Department that it cannot see the plans yet.

Mr Millar said in his letter that it was feared that a public argument about the design would delay a start on the buildings. Christchurch was well-known, he said, for its propensity to waste time on semi-public argument instead of taking steps to get a job done.

Mr Oakley said on Monday evening that the trust was very anxious to see the plans

before it was too late to alter them.' “I hope they come to light pretty soon,” he said. Mr P. J. Beaven said the plans should riot be sacrosanct. but should be put beforei the public for discussion. This was the practice now in Britain in the case of important buildings.

“There is .no overtone there,” he said, "that if you sayanything ‘anti’- you’re holding anything up. The fact that the Supreme Court plans have got nowhere since 1935 should not be used as a rea-son-for not having informed discussion. and comment now."