AUDITOR’S “TAG”

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 61, 5 December 1930, Page 10

AUDITOR’S “TAG”

Municipal Conference DELEGATES’ EXPENSES Indignation in Auckland Dominion Special Service. Auckland, December 4. Indignation at the small amount allowed for the expenses of delegates to the Municipal Conference and executive meetings of the Municipal Association was expressed at a special meeting of the Auckland City Council, when it was intimated that the council’s statutory accounts and statements for the year ended March 31 last had been “tagged” by the Auditor-General on the ground that the limit of £4O for such expenses, fixed by the Municipal Corporations Act, had been exceeded.

The last conference was held at Invercargill, the council’s delegates being the Mayor, Mr. G. Baildon, and Mr. T. Bloodworth. In addition the Mayor has attended two meetings of the executive of the Municipal Association in Wellington. This “tag” was the only one attached to the accounts.

“This matter will have to be fixed up and we will have to pay the excess,” said the Mayor. “You can see how closely we are tied down when we are allowed only £4O to attend conference and executive meetings.” Mr. J. B. Paterson: What is the amount of the excess? The Mayor: We will find that out. Miss E. Melville and Mr. M. J. Coyle expressed the view that the attention of the Municipal Association should be drawn to the point. “This is absurd,” said Mr. Coyle. “Two delegates went to the conference and the Mayor has to attend meetings of the executive from time to time. He would have to live in very cheap boardinghouses to keep within the limit. I understand we are not allowed any more than small boroughs.” The Mayor: That is so. An alteration in the Act is required. The Mayor then moved that the bal-ance-sheet be adopted and finally settled. In seconding the motion, Mr. Paterson said the Auditor-General’s report should be a direct answer to all the carping criticisms the council had been subjected to during the past year. The officers of the council were entitled to congratulations on the satisfactory statement. As far as the “tag” was concerned, the train fares to and from Invercargill would alone absorb £3O. The motion was then carried.