A MAYOR'S JOB

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 85, 11 April 1933, Page 10

A MAYOR'S JOB

WHAT IS IT WORTH ?

DISCUSSION AT PETONE

The next Mayor of Petone will reccivo only £180 a year as honorarium, instead of tho £200 a year ' hitherto paid. This decision was made by the Petone Borough Council last night by seven rotes to two after an' animated discussion. Pursuant to notice, Councillor J. W. Longman moved that tho Mayor's honorarium be reduced from £200 to £150 a year. Mentioning the present tendency towards economy by public bodies, ho forecast a 'strenuous time for the incoming council, and thought that'any small saving would help. To his mind £200 a year for the Mayor was excessive. Wellington paid £500 to its Mayor; on a population basis that was less than Id a head, Petone paid 4d a head. The council had inflicted a.lO per cent, cut on the wages of its staff, and it should also reduce the Mayor's honorarium. Councillor Longman concluded with a reference to the example, of economy set by/ the Governor-General. "Just to give it a start," Councillor C. P. Brockelbank seconded the motion, but said that in his opinion a reduction to about £170 or £180 would be sufficient. He had heard a good deal about the matter from different members of tho community. LEAD TO NEW ZEALAND? "I know we have to study economy, but I would-be sorry if we gave a lead to the rest of New Zealand on a matter of this kind," said Councillor V. E. Jacobson. A man was given the office of Mayor as an honour and with it ho was given sufficient pocket-money to prevent the job from becoming a drain on his ordinary resources. Any man who was elected Mayor would certainly be of charitable instincts and would certainly have extraordinary calls to meet, so that a reduction in his honorarium would be paltry. The Mayor had to contribute to many bodies and Societies, and; charity knocked -at his door every .day. His honorarium was not to be regarded as wages but as a sort of fund for unauthorised expenditure to bo used as he thought fit. It would bo . difficult to get a man in ,a suburban town like Petone with sufficient private means to hold the office of Mayor without an honorarium. "If he's good enough to gain the votes*of the electors he's good' enough to be trusted withi that amount of money," said Councillor Jacobson in defenco of the £200 a year. "We're only ■ keeping in lino with the others,"- countered Councillor Brockelbank. TEN PER CENT. CUT. Councillor J. C. Burns moved an amendment that the honorarium be reduced to £180. He said he recognised that the Mayor's position was a difficult one and had to be. kept up, but as trustees of the ratepayers' money the council should act consistently by reducing the honorarium by 10 per cent., as it had reduced'its employees' wages by that amount. Their present Mayor Qiv. D. McKonzie) was more open-hearted than the average, and Councillor Burns thought it just possible that advantage had been taken of that. He did not see why the Mayor should be' a means of relieving distress. They had other channels for that. ■ ■ • ■ • . ■ ■ 7 • ■ ; ■ ' •In seconding the ■ amendment, Councillor E. T. E. Hogg said he was sure the council would have made a reduction in the honorarium when it reduced tho wages of its staff but for the fact that it regarded the Mayor as having a two-year's' contract.' He would, be the last to belittle the contributions to charities made by tho present Mayor or'the help given by every Mayor, but the council must bo consistent. . • . ■ . Opposition to any reduction in. the honorarium was voiced by. Councillor A. Scholefield. The_coming of the depression, he said, had meant .moro work and greater financial, obligations for the Mayor, and he did not think they could fittingly reduce his honorarium. It was pointed out by Councillor Jacobsou that wages tax had to be paid on the honorarium, so that a reduction to, say, £150 would mean a reduction to £150 minus wages tax. Councillor Longman- agreed that. a 10 per cent, reduction in the honorarium would bo sufficient,.so he withdrew his motion reducing it to £150. Tho motion reducing it to £180 was voted for by all tho Councillors except Councillors Jacobson and Scholefield, who opposed it.