BETTER SYSTEM WANTED

Evening Star, Issue 21232, 13 October 1932, Page 2

BETTER SYSTEM WANTED

CORPORATION OFFICIALS AND THEIR CARS MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURE OF £4,000 A YEAR The statement that the annual cost of maintaining corporation motor cars —apart from vehicles used for commercial purposes and working transport—was £4,000, a sum approximately equal to the capital cost of the cars themselves, was made at last night’s City Council meeting by Crs J. J. Clark and F. W. Mitchell, who started a discussion on the necessity for an immediate revision of the present system with a view to cutting down expenditure. Referring to a clause in the Electric Power and Lighting Committee’s report which recommended that authority be granted to invite tenders for the purchase of two cars to replace two that were purchased in 1920, Cr Clark said that it was costing £4,(JUU a year to maintain the corporation motor cars —not taking into consideration commercial vehicles and cars used for transport. It seemed to him that the time had come when they should have a thorough investigation of the whole position and sec whether they were using the most economical methods. They knew that everybody who ran a corporation car could bring a good case as to why he should have one, but at the same time he thought that the council was spending far too much money on these cars, and that some more economical system should be investigated. The annual cost of maintaining the fleet was approximately equal to the capital cost of the cars. Cr F. W. Mitchell (in answer to a doubting interjection) : That’s right. The Mayor (Air R. S. Black) said he was pleased that the matter had been brought up. He thought that the amount saved if the council had the transport of its officials carried out by contract would be an eye-opener. There would not then be three or four cars standing in the Octagon all day or cases of men driving to lunch and back every day. He knew of one tramway man who, although he lived near a terminus, almost always motored to and from his homo. The whole principle was wrong. It brought about a tremendous wastage. The council should bring down some scheme that would ease the expenditure of the departments. For instance, there were several engineers working in the office, and it seemed to him that one car should be sufficient to take one or other of them out when necessary. The point might be brought up that these ears wore of commercial value to the departments, but if the annual cost of maintaining them was £4,000 it was certain that they did not get the extra value out of them. “ There must be no sentiment about it,” declared His Worship. “We should tackle the position inunodiate’y and devise a more economical system.” Cr J. B. Shacklock ; Some time ago the Finance Committee was making similar investigations. Judging by the talk that has gone across the table tonight, however, it does not seem as if much has been done. Cr J. -I. Alarlow (chairman of the Electric Power and Lighting Commit- 1 tee) said that nobody was more anxious than himself to do away with unnecessary cars, but lie could state definitely that the cars mentioned in the report were to be used solely for commercial purposes and were necessary for the efficient running of the department. It would be more expensive to employ outsiders to do the driving, for they would then have to pay an extra man. He did not think there was any department in whicli cars wore used less for pleasure. I fact, he fancied he had made himself a little unpopular when ho had stopped two or three officials from using their cars for going home to lunch, and some time ago the electrical engineer (Air Henderson) and he had gone carefully into the whole question and had cut expenses down to the minimum. The clause was adopted.