TOO MANY COUNTIES.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXII, Issue 46, 23 August 1911, Page 3

TOO MANY COUNTIES.

Mr. G. V. Peatce, M.P. (Patea) moved at the Counties Conference yesterday afternoon :•— "That the Government should net agree to co many new couhties being constituted, but that fair areas of counties should pievail, having in view community of interests, boundaries to be adjusted to suit 'such interests and geographical features." The present system of subsidies woa a premium for the establishment of Bmallor countries. The papei in a emtil! town in a district of a county, with a view to further business, &gitttted until a county was granted the district. Th^re was getting to be too much local government. The counties were becoming co small that they could not keep a decent staff. 'At present they seemed to Ire getting back to something like the old Toad boards system only worse. The procees wae altogether against the interest of the county and against lb« interest of the country also as a. whole. The system of subdividing counties wrb becoming a costly curse to the country. Tho large county wss fat more efficient than the small one and the tendency should rather be in the direction of larger bodies, Mr.' D. Gitehtist (Southlahd) spoke very strongly on the small county movement, and suggested there should be nt» power to create. Bmall counties out of large' ones Mr. W. C. Dudley (fegmolit), speaking as a representative of oh& of the n«\vlyformed smaller counties, said that the old counties in many instances were Tar too large a-ftd subdivision had resulted in better ahd more economical working and -administration. Mr. Pearce in reply explained that he did not object to readjuslmente «itn alterations of t boundaries. It was nobody's business in Parliament to look after the business. The motion was carried almost unanimously. The discussion was renewed on a. remit 1 from Ashburton : — "Th&t in futureno new county be formed wheie Road Boards exist unless of a rateable value Of (say) £2,000.000." Mr. J. B. Gow (Opotikt) contended thfcl the large local bodies wes the only powet capable of withstanding the cett* tralising tendency of the Government. The motion was carried by a largo majority, an amendment to make the minimum rateable value £1,000.000 being defeated. Mr. R. K. Simpson (Rangitikei) moved— "That powers be given to the councils of a borough town disk-let and a county whose boundaries are contigu« ous to alter sttch boundaries by mutual consent in the same manner that tho councils of two adjacent counties are empowered to armmd the county botmdarits." The motion was earned unanimously. Mr. J. W. Foreman (Clifton) moved— "That this couhcil protests against any altefatioifHjf the county franchise that would deprive ratepayers of their present voting potter or extend the fron* chise to non-ratepayere." He declared that to carry out county elections' on the Parliamentary franchise would be fth ex» ceedingly dangerous thing. Mr, W. C. Dudley (Egmont) agreed declaring that the Parliamentary fran» chise would put it in the power of a group of men to ruin a county. Mr. A. D. M'Leod (Feathemton) strongly objected to plural voting and

contended that the way the conference cling to the plural vote we* not \mhout its perils to tl»* welfare of coinHieo. Mr, S. Bolton (Pahiaiua.) vehemently urged the plural vote for elections in district?, where man had to bear the cost.. The motion was carried with two dissentients.