LOCAL BODIES

Evening Post, Volume CXXVI, Issue 58, 6 September 1938, Page 13

LOCAL BODIES

AUCKLAND AREA

AMALGAMATION ISSUE

OPPOSING VIEWS

Opposing views regarding the amalgamation of local authorities were placed before the Select Committee on the Local Government (Amalgamation Schemes) Bill this morning when the measure was criticised by the Auckland Suburban Local Bodies' Association, and supported, with reservations, by the Auckland City Council. The association agreed that there was need for local body reform, but argued against the Bill as a suitable instrument for reform. On the other hand, the Auckland City Council supported . , the Bill, but had suggestions to make regarding the personnel of the proposed commission to deliberate on amalgamations. Mr. D. W. Coleman (Government, Gisborne) presided over the meeting of the Committee, and other members i present were the Minister of Internal I Affairs (the Hon. W. E. Parry), Messrs. J W. T. Anderton (Government, Eden),j H. M. Rushworth (Independent, Bay i of Islands), C. M. Williams (Government, Kaiapoi), J. Robertson (Government, Masterton), J. W. Munro (Government, Dunedin North), and the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates (National, Kaipara). Mr. I. J. Goldstine, Mayor of One Tree Hill, and president of the Auckland Suburban Local Bodies' Association, appeared for the association. The Auckland City Council was represented by the deputy Mayor (Councillor J. A. C. Allum), Councillor C. Bailey, and the Hon. T. Bloodworth, M.L.C. Mr. Goldstine reviewed the proposals of the Bill, and said there was a complete absence of design in the measure. This omission must surely result in serious anomalies through haphazard and piecemeal amalgamation schemes being formulated. REFORM NOT OPPOSED. "I do not wish to convey the impression that the local authorities I represent here today are opposed to the reform of local government, where such is found necessary," Mr. Goldstine said. "On the contrary, we are convinced that there is definite room for improvement within the existing system, but nevertheless insist that the Bill under consideration is badly designed, in that it does not provide for investigation and research before the submission of amalgamation schemes; which omission will result in the local authorities throughout the Dominion moving without expert guidance, and the final result may quite possibly be less satisfactory than the existing system." Continuing, Mr. Goldstine dealt with amalgamations in Brisbane and elsewhere to show that they had not succeeded, and said that Greater Berlin had gone in the opposite direction Nby establishing twenty districts with independent rights of supervision. "Summed up," said Mr. Goldstine, "the association I represent considers that the Bill should be opposed on the following grounds:— "1. That the compulsory amalgamation clauses are objectionable in that they constitute a definite danger to true democratic control of local government, with consequential risk of transfer to bureaucratic control. v, su 1 .,/!2. -That; ; ,thje. Bill. ..shows. A complete^ ~ absence of design, .whereas a compre- ■'••.'■ herisive survey of the Dominion local V government system should first be undertaken by a practical and expert Commission, on which survey a scheme of reform could be based, thus avoiding costly and possibly irremediable •«... errors. NEED FOR SURVEY. "As an indication of the need for a comprehensive survey of the Dominion local government system, I may mention the following matters among the many calling for attention:— "1. To clearly define those functions best undertaken by the central and local governments respectively. There is, today, a growing tendency to overlap. "2. To determine the lines on which local government should develop. The present tendency is for special authorities to be set up to control special services. Is this desirable or should a ■-■ regional system of local government be established? If the latter, or if the present county system is retained, what is the ideal area and/or population for separate control? "3. The incidence of local taxation and the desirability of establishing one uniform valuation system for rating purposes, in place of the existing three systems. 4. Accounting reforms, franchise, etc. 5. There is also the question of displaced staffs. Provision should be made in the Bill for the protection of employees of an absorbed local authority; Those most likely to be affected are executive officers, who may, after a lifetime of service in local government, be relegated to the scrap heap. When questioning the witness, Mr. Parry quoted from a report by the Town Clerk of Brisbane, who said the amalgamation there had been an undoubted advantage. Mr. Parry said he had visited Brisbane when he was in Australia and had questioned many of the citizens. He had come to the conclusion that the amalgamation there was an undoubted success. A letter from the Birkenhead Borough Council stated that the council was in support of the objects of the Bill and dissociated itself from the re- « presentations of the association. Mr. Goldstine said the attitude of the Birkenhead 'Council had been changed since the letter was written. Mr. Parry: Has there been a change of Government there? Mr. Goldstine: There has certainly been a change of representation. CITY COUNCIL ATTITUDE. Presenting the views of the Auckland City Council, Councillor Allum said the council had carried the f ollowiftg resolution:—"Having given consideration to the matter of. amalgamation as provided for in the Local Government (Amalgamation Schemes) Bill." the council adopts- the principle of amalgamation and rearrangement of boundaries so as to embrace those local bodies within the Auckland isthmus with a community of interest in municipal development." "The council may therefore be said to be in favour of the Bill which provides the necessary machinery to give effect to, its defined attitude to amalgamation and rearrangement of boundaries among those local bodies within the Auckland isthmus with a com- . munity of interest," Mr. Allum said. "On this point of view, however, three features require to be stressed: "A policy which postulates unconditional amalgamation as a general principle must be made ancillary to an examination of individual merit. Arbitrary grouping or rearrangement of | boundaries of contiguous local districts, thus providing for a mere absorption, is in itself not sufficient. A scheme of individual amalgamation must be preceded by a close examination of financial and other considerations, so as to foster maximum public benefit. The public, as such, are entitled to see that a major authority accepts amalgama-

tion with proper financial and legal safeguards.

"An over-riding consideration must be that of community of interest. Auckland, from a metropolitan aspect, has experienced in recent years marked changes in the incidence of residences, constant expansion having brought it, in addition to over-lapping boundaries, ever-increasing demands for amenities, for the cost of provision and maintenance of which the ratepayers o_f Auckland city proper should receive fair and reasonable relief. Civic amenities in the past have been one of Auckland's greatest features, but a slowing down in that regard will be inevitable if the present inequitable system is allowed to prevail and a selfish viewpoint sponsored. Having in mind the necessity for the provision of amenities concomitant with the growth of the metropolitan area, the council's policy has been to endeavour to have the burden involved in their provision equitably shared. The presence, however, of arbitrarily drawn boundaries of contiguous local districts has impeded the provision and just distribution of the cost of such amenities despite the fact that their provision has brought widespread benefits, the influence of which perceptibly accrues to the whole community irrespective of their municipal grouping. ''The multiplicity of local bodies in the area of the Auckland isthmus has rendered administration difficult. The I administration by the Auckland City j Council, for example, of such public ! utilities of the nature of electricity, drainage, and passenger transport, has been impeded by the presence of arbitrarily drawn local district boundaries, and a solution from the administrative point of view was found in the formation of ad hoc bodies without regard to the merits of municipal administration. MEASURE APPROVED. "We are of opinion that the redrafting of the Bill provides the Minister with improved facilities for giving effect to the purposes of the intended legislation," Mr. Allum added later. "Generally the Bill is, in our opinion, on the right lines, and,it would only be to discuss detail to say that perhaps certain features of local government amalgamation matters might be dealt with more effectively in the Bill, or, alternately, that certain procedure outlined in the Bill might be made less circuitous. . . . We are of the opinion, moreover, that the provisions of the Bill, as they now are, adequately safeguard the rights of local authorities, and give a desired measure of protection against hasty and perhaps ill-considered action." Dealing with the personnel of the Commission proposed in the Bill. Mr. Allum said his council suggested the Commision should consist of a Judge of the Supreme Court as chairman; the Engineer-in-Chief, Public Works Department, or his representative; the Under-Secretary, Department of Internal Affairs, or his representative; the Secretary to the Treasury, or his representative; and one member representing local authorities. In reply to a question by Mr. Parry, Mr. Allum Said hife council wanted to avoid a partisan tribunal. AGREED ON REFORM. The Auckland City Council believed in bigger and more satisfactory local authorities as proposed in the Bill; Mr. Bailey said. The ten local authorities and the special authorities administering special services all agreed that reform was necessary. Although the Bill gave every encouragement for adjoining local bodies to prepare amalgamation plans, the Auckland City Council was forced to the conclusion that the compulsory clauses of the Bill, to which chief objection was, taken, were most essential. Mr. Bailey said he believed a reduction in local authorities was a good thing. He did not suggest there should be amalgamations that were not in the best interests of the community. Brisbane had .been quoted to show the failure of amalgamation, but hundreds of successful fusions had taken place in England in recent years. Auckland could point to the amalgamations that had taken place since 1913 —Parnell, Arch Hill, Grey Lynn, Remuera, Eden Terrace, Epsom, Point Chevalier, Avondale, Tamaki, "and Orakei —each one of them of inestimable benefit to the districts concerned. "We do not believe that the Bill should be condemned because it does not lay down any concrete design," [Mr. Bailey said. "We believe that the purpose of the measure is merely to provide the framewqrk within which positive designs may be drawn. up. It is true that under the proposed legislation it would appear that every local authority will have the onus placed upon it of proving its raison d'etre, and I think this is as it should be when we consider that the boundaries have been arrived at ■ without any consideration of community interests or geography."

In conclusion, Mr.r Bailey said the question of amalgamation had been carefully considered and they were satisfied that there would be advantages in consolidation of the ten local authorities in the Auckland isthmus area.

The Committee adjourned until 2.45 this afternoon.