AMALGAMATION

Evening Post, Volume CXIX, Issue 24, 29 January 1935, Page 10

AMALGAMATION

PETONE AND LOWER HUTT

MERITS OF WARD SYSTEM

CALL FOR BROAD OUTLOOK

The members of the Petone Borough Council last evening discussed the invitation of the Mayor of Lower Hutt (Mr. J. W. Andrews) to the Mayor of Petone (Mr. A. Scholefield) to. discuss the possibilities of holding a poll in connection with the municipal elections in May on the question of amalgamation. The matter.was discussed in its various aspects. Some councillors were in favour of amalgamation on certain terms, while others ■were of the opinion that the time was not opportune. .Finally, after various suggestions had been made on the form in which the matter could be referred to the electors, it was decided that it was not desirable that a poll should be held in connection with the municipal elections, so the matter was referred to the next council. The.Mayor (Mr. Scholefleld) made the following statement that was afterwards warmly commended by several councillors as a capable and broadininded review of the position:— "In. expressing your opinions or cpnvictions of amalgamation I would ask you not to introduce the parochial feeling which has always stood out prodominant when the question of amalgamation of the two boroughs has been mentioned; forget for the time being on. what side of the Hutt Bridge or Wakefiold Street wo reside, and display a broad outlook on this question. Is it ■not more important to realise that, we have "a large population within the ronibined area who have; the_ right'to demand that the best "possible communal services should be given to them, and that the 4838 acres comprising the combined area should be so. developed as to bring about the highest possible standard of . communal development, efficiency, and economy. Can this be given whilst the people and the area are divided into , two boroughs. intersected with .another local body—the Hutt Biver Board? .. , ' "Can we not visualise what comprehensive services and economy could be instituted through a united borough; comprising the Petone and Lower Hutt boroughs, the Petone arid Lower Hutt Gas lighting Board, and the Hutt Biver Board than, is possible by the maintenance of these separate local bodies! ?'lt is hot generally known that upon the amalgamation of the Petone and Lower Hutt boroughs the Gas Board would automatically cease, to exist, and the undertaking become merged within such amalgamation. I realise that it would mean a Parliamentary enactment to bring the Biver Board within a scheme'of amalgamation, but this is not so with the other three local bodies mohtioned, whose electors have the necessary powers to determine by ballot vote. ' : "The last occasion when we discuss'ed'this question was in December, 1932, when tho positions of the engineer of Lower Hutt, the Town Clerk of Petone, and. the secretary of the Petone and Lower Hutt Gas Lighting Board were all vacant, temporary, appointments only having been made in each instance, and this made staff changes less complicated fo.r the reorganisation of the engineer's and Town Clerk's department under a united borough. Neither council took advantage of the position thus created. "In my opinion the most favourable opportunity, from every point of view, for'amalgamation of the two boroughs was in 1927, when the councillors of .each borough met in conference. Tho outcome of this was the appointment, of Mr." G. J. J. Feil to bring down a report for submission to a further conference in the near future: ''■■" : .'• •"INFOEMATiON REFUSED." "It is •certainly not to the credit of the then Mayor and councillors. of Lower Hutt' that the information re-quired-by Mr. Foil, to compile his report was refused by them, causing the report be hung up for a period of over two.years, for the simple reason that the Lower Hutt Borough Council desired/to retain the sole control of the development scheme they had in hand, also to await the time when Lower Hutt's population exceeded Petone's. These ■; are not' wild- statements but declarations made. by; members of ■ that council., "No wonder it has been said by Petone's residents 'that under a scheme of amalgamation Petone'a residents would be saddled -with the expenditure of the: development which. has and is taking place in Lower Hutt.' ' "If has also been said 'that under a scheme of amalgamation Lower Hutt, having a larger population, .would dominate the position and that'Petone would suffer by lack of sufficient representation on the council established.' ; "As a rebuttal of these statements I would point out that clause 148 of the Municipal Corporations1 Act, 1932, provides for a ward system which, if given. effect to, would.give representation according to population. Also, clauses' 77, 78, and 79 of the same Act . make provision for the levyingof rates in' such a manner that the rates made and levied in'any one or more of such wards may vary from that in another or others. "In brief, the foregoing, if put in operation, means that Petone would have its just representation on the council; also, it would have its separate rating area, and therefore would, not, as. stated, be burdened with the expenditure of the development which has, and is, taking place in Lower Hutt Borough. . Despite what action Has or has not been taken by past councils we should display a broad, unbiased out- . look when discussing and consider- ■ ing this: important question. "Providing the ward system and • special rating areas were to be established under a scheme of amalgamation, then, and only then, woiild I be prepared to be a party to the amalgamation, of Lower Hutt. with Petone and the Biver Board. Ultimately the necessity for special rating areas may disappear. . ■ ; "Amalgamation on the lines suggested would localise development expenditure and financial commitments for tho time being, but it would also enable us to get together and tackle , problems which the increased population of the lower part of the Valley has produced and future development would create. "Immediate consideration could, and should, bo given to the following:— ■ (a) The preparation, and development of a . town-planning scheme which should comprise specified areas for residential and industrial purposes. : (b)- A comprehensive development of Uio" beach area. •':- ---(c) -Beclamation and development . of. the river estuary. (d) A new bridge to deal with the increased traffic to and from the bays and Wainui-6-mata, connecting the 'Esplanade with the proposed eastern area to be reclaimed at the river estuary."These services and utilities are the

needs of the area comprising the two boroughs and the Eiver Board. "As to the local prido and traditions of the respective boroughs, well, theso would bo preserved auci handed down to posterity by tho people forming the city, whatever its namo may be. The Petone and Lower Hutt locality would remain so for all time. "As to future representation, why worry about this? Wo are of little account anyhow —here today and gone tomorrow, and the world will go on I without us. - Whatover our views as individuals or collectively as a council on amalgamation may be, tho electors have the,right by vote to determine whether, it shall or shall not take place.. , Councillor G. London stated that in amalgamation it was essential that it should be unconditional. As things were at present Petone would be the loser. "I think we should call on Lower Hutt to get their house into a little better order before wo become a partner to this partnership," said Mr. London. RATEPAYERS SHOULD DECIDE. Councillor J. 0. Burns said; the whole thing in a nutshell was that the ratepayers should havo a say. To his mind,, it was preferable that instead, of .councillors giving their individual views round the table, both sides should place their views before the electors of Petone. There was very littlo expense attached to it, aud plenty of time between now and the next elec-. tioa for the expression of opinion on the1 matter. . The Mayor said that some would agree to amalgamation on' certain terms, and. some on other terms. As far as he was concerned, he would agree to amalgamation only on some conditions. ••••••■•■ Councillor E. N. Campbell expressed the-opinion-that'there would be a difference of opinion round the council table on tho matter. The result of a vote by the council would have an effect on the poll at the election. Ho agreed with Councillor Eurns that it would be -better-to wait until the election,- -when councillors and other candidates could put forward their views. Councillor E. T. E. Hogg said he would like to .congratulate the Mayor on his statement, which, while broadminded, had regard to certain essentials required in the interests of the borough. Before anything went on tue'ballofpaper at all the council would havo to decido'one of three things: (1)* "Whether ' there was going to be a ballot at" all;' (2) whether amalgamation would bo unconditional; (3) whether amalgamation would take place in certain forms. Petono would have to draft what it wanted, tell Lower Hutt so, and if the latter body agreed, then the matter would go before the electors of both boroughs. Ho agreed with the Mayor that the electors should be educated on tho issues. There were two general groups of objection. One was the question of finance, bound up in which was the matter of development, and the other was the possible loss of business to ono of the boroughs, and the matter of how the centre, of administration would be shifted. On the other hand, there would be a saving in the co-ordination of-services,-and the combined effort in' carrying out a scheme of development for both. Several problems would be -solved,-and one was the ownership of Gear Island. This "tasty morsel" was desired by both Petone and Lower Hutt, but amalgamation would bring it under a joint area. Tiae Hutt Valley was on the verge of a period of considerable industrial development. A new'factory was put up about every month. ■.■■'■ »■■■•■ "COMPLETE AMALGAMATION IMPOSSIBLE." Complete .amalgamation was impossible for Petone,. continued Mr. Hogg. The financial management needed to be kdpt apart.' In the event of amalgamation, a city would be formed that would be about the fifth or sixth in the Dominion. .The place would be so big that there would still have to be two police stations, two post offices, two railway stations, etc., but there would have to be an. administrative centre. Ho thought the administration could be Under the ward system on the lines suggested. , : ■ "The Hutt will never agree to it. They want out-and-out amalgamation/ said Councillor E.N., Campbell. In reply to a question by Councillor B. W. Toomath, it was explained that when a ward was developed in a certain regard tho cost of it was borne by the ward concerned. . The Mayor said that the ward system could pave the way for a more complete form of amalgamation. .'■ ... Mr. Toomath stated that Mr. Feil recommended that if amalgamation took place it should take place unconditionally. He must have had very solid-reasons for making this recommendation, said Mr. Toomath. : Councillor W. H. Edwards said he could foresee the, trouble that would occur in a few years after several of the local bodies had amalgamated. In his opinion the present time was inopportune. . When amalgamation took place the Government would give the lead. : There were enough burdens at. present, with the relief rates of pay. "NOTHING TO ADVANTAGE." Councillor J. Cummlng's view was that no argument had been advanced by a councillor as to why amalgamation should take place. He was in favour of amalgamation to a degree, he said, as many could do more than a few. The schemo was brought up. about 25 years ago, and the same conclusion was reached then as at more recent conferences—"in favour to a point, but time not opportune." The reason for amalgamation should be economy, but he could not see how the economy would come in. He was not in favour of having the Hutt Eiver Board as a "buffer state." Ho was not going to be party to a proposal liko tho present without referring it to tho people for decision. In the event of amalgamation a number of highlypaid officers would be imported with several "off-siders" under them, and the people would never bo able to have access to them. The Town Clerk of Wellington was as closely guarded as Hitler. It was a despicable thing that the Petone and Lower Hutt Gas Lighting Boardj that was administered by representatives of Lower Hutt and Petone, should arrange a poll for new works to givo cheaper gas, and then,' while Petone passed the proposal, Lower Hutt should turn it down, the opposition being sponsored by a few people, some of whom were not even consumers of gas. Lower Hutt, also, had not been very helpful to Petone with regard to discussions with the city over water. In his view there were too many boards. Ho moved that the matter be referred to the incoming council. WARDS AND PAROCHIALISM. The strongest argument for amalgamation was its so-called inevitableness, said Councillor D. M. Dickson. It might be inevitable, ho said, but he did not think that it had crept on so much that they had to agree to it at once. The ward system of government would create parochialism, so it would be better for Potone to carry on as it was now. Councillor Toomath said that the ratepayers of both boroughs were not conversant with the position at the present time. If they were going to educate the electors through the election meetings they would get very small attendances. sTho matter could quite safely be left in the hands of the Government, at the present time. The Government would first approach amalgamation with a view to putting hun-

drods of small redundant local bodies under the control of major local bociies. He was not prepared to voto for unconditional amalgamation, nor for a ward system. Tho Mayor said that amalgamation would certainly have to include the Hutt Biver Board, and as legislation was needed for this, it could not be made the subject of a poll at the next municipal elections. There was not enough time for that. There were several suggestions on what form a poll could take, but finally tho discussions centred round tho danger of taking the poll in connection with the municipal elections. Councillor Cuinming's motion that the matter bo referred to the incoming council, was seconded by Councillor W. H. Edwards. On the suggestion of Councillor Hogg, it was decided to add to the motion the words "as it was not a desirable thing to put before the electors at the municipal elections." The motion was carried unanimously.