MR. SEMPLE’S REPLY

Greymouth Evening Star, 9 December 1940, Page 9

MR. SEMPLE’S REPLY

PUBLIC MONEY WASTED. ‘ [per press association.] WELLINGTON, December 8. “For a job of this kind to cost about £20,000 more than it should have, is, to my mind, nothing more or less than a public scandal,” said the Minister for Public Works (Mr. Semple)' today, referring to the Awatere water supply scheme and remarks made by the chairman of the Awatere County Council, Mr. L. L. T. Bush, in a report published last Wednesday. Mr. Bush was reported to have advised the Minister to “curb his tongue and give up melodrama and playing on psychology.”

The Minister said his attention had been drawn to the report of Mr. Bush’s statement. “Mr. Bush was referring to a deputation of ratepayers of the Awatere county in reference to the Awatere water supply scheme that waited on me when I was in Blenheim approximately a fortnight before,” Mr. Semple said. “Mr. Bush would lead your readers to believe that my language was coarse and offensive. The strongest words that I used (as reported in the ‘Marlborough Express’ of November 19), and the ones to which Mr. Bush is probably referring, were that the job had been ‘muddled’ and ‘fooled with’ since the beginning, and that the estimating was ‘rotten,’ and that there had been no proper cooperation between the councillors themselves on the job. “As one of the trustees of public money, I have a perfect right to express my indignation when I know that public money has been needlessly vested. I have had a lot to do with many subsidised jobs controlled by county councils and other local bodies since I have been Minister for Public Works, but this is one of the most regrettable experiences of my whole ministerial career. For a job of this kind to cost about £20,000 more than it should have is, to my mind, nothing more nor less than a public scandal.

“It will be interesting to the ratepayers to know that there is £22,500 of public mopey in this scheme. The Government has been liberal and tolerant to an extreme with the county. Notwithstanding that we were conscious of the fact that the job was not being run efficiently, we overlooked that and gave additional money to help them through; not for the sake of the county but for that of the ratepayers. It is my duty, as Minister for Public Works, when these, subsidies are granted, to keep a watchful eye upon the development of the jobs and to see that the public money is wisely and well spent. “Mr. Bush must be a very thinskinned individual, or he would not take exception even to severe criticism when he ought to know, and his own councillors admit, that the job has been fooled and muddled. One member of the deputation to me made this statement: ‘The ratepayers have lost confidence in the council. I think this is a fair statement, and a by-election recently proved it. It would happen again if there was another by-elec-tion.’ That is a condemnation, not from me, but from one of the men who resents the way this job has been run right from the start. “The job was originally estimated to cost £44,500, but will now cost about £60,000. It will be information for the ratepayers to know that Hume Steel, Ltd., offered to do the whole job at a cost of £41,139/10/10. This offer was turned down by the county. Had they accepted it, their responsibility would have ended there; the job would have been finished and the ratepayers would have been receiving the service. What has Mr. Bush to say about that? In view of this evidence, the county has deliberately and wilfully thrown away approximately £20,000, and the job is still uncompleted. The ratepayers have to pay more and they are getting no service.

NO APOLOGY. “I make no apology to Mr. Bush or the county fox’ what I said to the ratepayers’ representatives who waited upon me. I used no offensive language; I made a plain statement of fact. I want to tell Mr. Bush definitely that where public money is being needlessly squandered, there will be no padlock upon my lips as he suggests, and I will use whatever language I choose to expose the business. “Mr. Bush criticised the deputation as a ‘mutual admiration society.’ That is an offence against his own ratepayers. They came to me like gentlemen, put their case, and asked me whether something could be done to expedite the job, as they did not know where they stood. All they suggested was that I should get one of my prominent engineers to check up on the job again, and give some professional advice to expedite the job and keep down the cost as much as possible. Anything that would be of benefit to them would be of equal benefit to the council. Surely they have the right to do that. I have a duty to meet people with a public grievance, and these men certainly have. Instead of Mr. Bush attempting to give me advice, he should fit himself to give helpful advice in the interests of the ratepayers, and not indulge in what I believe to be nothing more nor less than ■political spleen.”