PROPOSED STREET LOAN.

Evening Star, Issue 22627, 20 April 1937, Page 11

PROPOSED STREET LOAN.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —The' mayor will no doubt feel grateful to, Or Silverstoue for coming to his aid, even though he has used the time-honoured artifice of drawing a red herring across the path. In his effort to get His Worship out of a hole of his o,wn making, the chairman of the Finance Committee has unwittingly only pushed him further into it. Or Silverstone says that the contributor of tho statement in question wished your readers to believe that during 10 years £500,815 was spent on street maintenance and new work. Nothing of the kind. The five-year period figures given were clearly headed “ total works department expenditure.” The tables were used to show that tho all-in reduction of works department expenditure during the depression period was £62,801. The mayor had stated that road and footpath maintenance had been reduced by £IOO,OOO. Cr Silverstone says: “Special schedule expenditure ” has not been deducted. Very well. We shall take the figures given by him from each of tho five-year totals:— Total works department expenditure, five years: Pre-depression, £281,838; depression, £218,977. Less special schedule expenditure: Pre-depression, £85,000; depression, £70,823. Balance: £196,838, £148,154. Scavenging is about the same in each period, so this item would cancel out. The difference between these amounts —namely, £48,684 —is therefore the “ apparent ” lag in street maintenance. How does this compare now with the mayor’s figure of £100,000? —I am, etc., City Business Man. April 20.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —In last Friday’s ‘ Star ’ appeared a “local” iu which Cr Silverstone said that “unfortunately only ratepayers had the right to vote at the poll on April 22. The people who pajd rates through their rents, however, had no right to vote. He hoped that in the very near future all adult

citizens would have the right to vote on all questions, irrespective of whether they were ratepayers or not.” If Mr Silverstone could only get his own way in doing things, New Zealand would be a lovely country to live out of. It is a pity we cannot go back to the old system of voting for mayor and councillors, when only the one that actuallv paid the rates for a property was entitled to a vote. If that had been in force at the last election Mr Silverstone and his party and our mayor would not have had a chance of being elected. The time is overdue when the voting age should be raised to 25 for mayor, councillors, or members of Parliament. I trust all ratepayers will roll up next Thursday and vote, so that there will be 5 to 1 against the loan.—l am, etc., Progress. April 20.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —I would like'to’ask Our worthy mayor who gave him authority to keep the unemployed out of our rates. Does not the Government tax us for keeping the unemployed? Are we to be double-taxed to keep them—a good move by our Labour Government? Ratepayers should roll up on the 22nd and vote against this loan proposal, and not be persecuted by Labour. • We don’t know, if this'loan is sanctioned, where we shall land later,, as this is only a feeler to see how we" will stand up to it. Another £IOO,OOO next year for the unemployed will be certain.— I am, etc., Working Bullock. April 19.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —The poll in connection with the £IOO,OOO loan will give ratepayers an opportunity of expressing their disapproval of the irresponsible financial policy of the mayor and Labour members of the City Council. One hundred thousand pounds (fully half of which will be wasted in unemployed labour) is to be raised now, and when this is spent within two years another £IOO,OOO will be required. A further £IOO,OOO (Cr Silverstone indicated that this may be . increased to £300,000) is to be raised without reference to the ratepayers for a housing scheme. The loan on which a poll is to be held will saddle the ratepayers with an extra burden of £7,000 per annum for the next 20 years. Ratepayers at present pay unemployment tax, and why should they he singled out as a class to carry this extra burden? _ - The Socialistic policy of the Government and the Labour councillors is to take from those, who by their initiative, work, and thrift have saved something, to give to those who in many cases have squandered their substance in beer, gambling, hors© racing, and other forms of doubtful amusement. Non-Socialistic members of the community do not yet appear to realise tho trend of things, but they can rest assured that, however much efforts may be made to disguise it, the objective of Labour, whether in the Government or in the City Council, is to skin those who have anything. Fortunately Mr Semple lets the cat out of the bag at times, and he has stated the aims of his party, although Mr Savage misleads with the soft pedal. Ratepayers should not miss opportunity of going to tho poll on Thursday and voting against the proposal, if for nothing else as an indication of their opposition to the wildcat finance of Labour in the City Council. If ratepayers do not take this opportunity of expressing their disapproval they will live to regret it. Labour is now showing anxiety as to the result of the poll. Advertising propaganda and public meetings at tho expense of tho ratepayers indicate this. After, the poll it will know that a false move has been made.—l am, etc., Watchful. April 20.