HUTT AMALGAMATION

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 132, 1 December 1936, Page 16

HUTT AMALGAMATION

CASE FOR PETONE

A SUGGESTED COMMITTEE

A suggestion that the Pelone Borough Council should appoint a committee to prepare the Petone case in respect to the Hutt Valley amalgamation proposal was considered by (lie council last evening, on a motion by CounciHor J. R. Gaynor, but after discussion the matter was deferred. Councillor Gaynor said that the information collected by Petone would be strictly impartial. The Minister of Internal Affairs had said that legislation would provide for compulsory amalgamation, and a Commission would be set up. Local bodies would have to bring reasons why they should not be amalgamated. The motion was seconded by Councillor G. London. Councillor D. M. Dickson said that local thought against amalgamation had been silent in the past. There was a good deal to be said against amalgamation. Councillor J. dimming said the evidence the' committee would collect would probably be conflicting. He thought the Bill.would contain a clause allowing the people to have a say in the matter. The Mayor .(Mr. A. Scholefleld) stated that the proposed legislation would be circulated to local bodies for their approval or otherwise. It was pointed out that a committee consisting of two Government representatives and representatives of Hutt Valley local bodies was sitting at present, considering amalgamation, and was going into the question of boundaries. "It is a pro-amalgamation committee. They are waiting for compulsory amalgamation .to save them bringing down a report," said Councillor Gaynor. Councillor Cumming said he would not prejudice the case of. the committee now sitting. He thought the ratepayers of Petone should have a vote on the issue. However, there were many overlapping local bodies in New Zealand, and the legislation was needed. Councillor W. H. Edwards moved, and Councillor Cumming seconded, an amendment that the matter be held over until the present committee reports. Councillor JVC. Burns said that the council had no mandate from the ratepayers to prepare a case against amalgamation. Councillors stated that the Bill would be submitted to the local bodies for consideration and it could be examined in the Committee stages. Councillor A. M. Macfarlane sugIgested that a poll be taken of the ratepayers on amalgamation when the loan proposals are considered. By five votes to four, the council decided to hold the matter over until (he Hutt committee reports, and it was j decided to press for an early report.