DIFFERENT VIEWS

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 131, 30 November 1933, Page 12

DIFFERENT VIEWS

One of the arguments submitted by a deputation against the Government's borough amalgamation proposals was that they would force smaller boroughs into union with greater boroughs holding dissimilar views. A Sumner representative pointed out that Christchurch was governed by a^Labour council which held views entirely different from those of the suburban bodies. In practice this is often one of the greatest obstacles to amalgamation. One district likes one type of council and - another district prefers another. Even in Wellington such differences may be noted. The central part of the city desires a levelheaded conservative council; the higher suburbs tend to rise above considerations of cash balances. But if the validity of the argument is admitted, where will it lead us? If it is desirable to maintain divisions to secure community of interest, then it is equally desirable to encourage separation for the same purpose. But even small and seemingly homogeneous communities discover differences. What is then to be done unless we decide that every ratepayer shall have his own council? Even then there would be the difficulty of deciding whether the Mayor or the Mayoress should have the casting vote. Fortunately, however, Sumner's objection often disappears when there is actual amalgamation. The votes in small districts, have their weight in the total and modify the conservatism or radicalism of the central area. The council thus chosen does not satisfy anyone completely; but no council ever did. In fact, the association of people of dissimilar views is generally so unsatisfactory that it would never be adopted if common, sense and experience had not convinced us that disunion is much worse.