MOTION TO DISMISS AN ENGINEER

Dominion, Volume 18, Issue 219, 16 June 1925, Page 11

MOTION TO DISMISS AN ENGINEER

NEGATIVED BY 6 VOTES TO 4. By 6 votes to 4 the Petoue Borough Council, at its meeting last night, defeated the motion of Councillor A. Scholefield, "that in view of the important work pending, the council take the necessary steps to terminate the engagement of the borough engineer; that the position be declared vacant on a certain date to be fixed, and applications for the position be invited through the Press.” Ccuncillor Scholefield stated that in bringing the matter before the council he was “salving his conscience” of the promise he made to the electors. Councillor N. Campbell seconded the motion. Councillor T. Gallagher also supported the motion. “I have had experience of several engineers,’ 1 said the Mayor (Mr. J. W. McEwan), “and I know a good deal of their work. All I can say is that if this council is looking for an engineer of superhuman qualifications then they will have some trouble in finding one.” The . Mayor dealt with the work done by the engineer, including the extension of the reticulation scheme and the installation of a pumping station, thereby doubling the water supply, and stated he considered it quite satisfactory. “For any mistakes in the past,” he said, “tlie council must also accept responsibility. The finances of the borough have had to be conserved, and it was a mistake not to have raised the rates when prices of material and labour soared during the war. I do not know of another borough so situated that only half of its area is able to be rated. We have been forced to economise owing to the limits of our rating liability being so small compared with the size /of the borough. I have had a good deal to do with the engineer, and I 1 would rather do with the devil 1 know I than turn to the devil I do not know." Councillor A 7. Jacobsen said he did ! not think it very splendid or noble of anyone to go into the council with the idea of "sacking” the engineer He described the attitude of the supporters of the motion as "a backhanded knock.” "It is not a proper thing,” he said, "for men to come into the council to sack a man without looking inlo the details.” Councillor Cook maintained that the faults of the past rested not with the engineer, but with the council, who did not give him enough money. Even with paving their engineers in Wellington £l3OO or £l4OO they had streets in the city worse than any of those in I’ctone. Councillor J. Sharpe thought the present engineer was quite capable of doing the necessary work, and Councillors C. P. Brocklebank and 11. Jay were of the same opinion. Those who voted for the motion were Councillors A. Scholefield, T. Gallagher, N. Campbell, W. IL Edwarus, while those who voted against it were the Mayor (Mr. J. W. McEwan), Councillors C. P. Broclebank, W. Jacobsen, G. Cook, H. Jay, and J. Sharpe.