SMALLER COMMITTEES

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 147, 17 March 1933, Page 8

SMALLER COMMITTEES

City Council Motion Lost

7.

Au effort to reduce the size of City ’ Council committees was made by, Cr. J. N.' Wallace, who moved at last evening’s meeting of the council: — ‘•That standing order No. 83 .be amended to read: ‘No committee of the council shall be composed ,of more than five members.’ ” ,

CT. T. Forsyth'said it was a curious motion to bring down in the dying hours of the council. If alterations were to be made to the standing orders they should be left to the incoming council. He was .against the motion. Cr. J. Burns opposed the motion. He thought the committees were not large enough. It would have been much better if his suggestion and that the works committee were to consist of the council as a whole. Then they would know more about what works were going on and what was contemplated. On the contrary, Cr; H. A.: Huggins said that the smaller the committee the more efficient, work was done. He held that a committee of five was Ideal.' ■ '■ ' ■ Crs. W. H. Bennett, W. Duncan, and F. Meadowcroft were opposed to the motion. ■ ■ ' ■■■ ... . .

The Mayor, Mr. T. C, A. Hislop, said Cr. Meadowcroft’S opinion was certainly entitled to respect, as he was a member of more committees than any other councillor. The present system , had worked very well. He opposed the ■motion.- iA/A'/

■ On the motion being put, it was defeated bn the voices. /■