PROGRESS LEAGUE

Greymouth Evening Star, 15 December 1944, Page 8

PROGRESS LEAGUE

DEPUTY-MAYOR’S COMPLAINTS.

The Westland .District Progress League and' its"dealings with Minis- 1 ters of the Crown; and some of the questions with which it has concerned itself recently' came in for some caustic criticism by the DeputyMayor (Cr. P. Blanchfield) and other members at ‘a meeting of the Greymouth Borough" Council, last evening. A resolution of protest to the League and an amendment were put to the meeting, but both were lost and no ‘further resolutions were put forward, the Mayor commenting that probably the publicity which would be given to the criticism would have the desired effect.

Cr. Blanchfield opened the discussion by moving that the Progress League be advised that unless .it changes its attitude of antagonising and pin-pricking citizens of the town and harassing Ministers of the Crown the Council must dissociate itself from the activities of the League. He said that the Council had supported the League from the outset and had given it £2O of the ratepayers’ money, but many of' the resolutions of the League had been non-con-structive and had harassed citizens who had been doing their best for the town for years; A feeling was abroad in the town now —“Who is going to be next?” The Marlborough Street bridge, on which the League had written to the Council, had been before the Council for years and the Council had considered the question thoroughly. He wondered if the Council would have the support of the League when it went to the poll for a loan. Ministers of the Crown had been harassed to such an extent that now they did not bother replying to the League. Mr. Webb and Mr. O’Brien had been good friends of the Council and if the League was going to harass them they might not be as generous as in the past. Another instance of the League’s work was its complaint, now proved unfounded, of the state of the conveniences at the Opera House, conveniences which had served the public of Greymouth for three to four generations. The result of the League’s work was that the conveniences were now to be denied to the people of the town. • Cr. J. Stokes seconded the motion. He said that that evening they had had five or six letters from the League and there was no doubt but that they were only pin-pricking. Only recently too they had the case of the bakers of the town being harassed to wrap bread. All knew that there was a war on and that paper had to be conserved, and he would remind those who had been behind the move that the soldier at the front did not get his bread wrapped. Then there was the complaint about the hotel conveniences, which were no concern of the Council, except in the matter ol publie health. Another complaint was the one about the danger at the Blaketown bridge. There was no more live body than the Blaketown Ratepayers’ Association and they haci seen nothing in the bridge to comolain about. “The time has come lor this pin-pricking to stop, and if. it docs not stop I am of the same opinion as Cr. Blanchfield, that the Council should cancel its affiliation, concluded Cr. Stokes. Cr G. R. Harker said he agreed with Cr. Blanchfield that some of the items brought up by the League could well have been left. He had intended speaking at the next meeting of the League and asking that full inquiries be made before the League took up any matter. He had told them that the Marlborough Street bridge was on the estimates, but surely they had the right to point out to the Council the urgency pl the matter. As far as the harassing of Ministers was concerned ne thought the Ministers were well able to look after themselves. Cr. Boustridge said tnat U. Blanchfield had mentioned cooperation between local bodies, and yet he wanted the Council to give a public smib to another body, one of the youngest in the town. The League comprised citizens of the town who were eager to do then best for the town. They may have been over-zealous and not quite cautious in some cases, but that was no reason, why the Borough Council should administer a public snttb to them. So far as harassing Ministers of the Crown was concerned he would like a lot more evidence on that point than Cr. Blanchfield had given. He was not prepared to associate the Council with such a public snub.

Cr. A. L. McKay agreed with Cr Boustridge. He said it was a bit narking at times to have proposals which had already been considered brought up again, and he thought a lot could have been avoided with a little co-operation between the two bodies. He moved an amendment that the League be advised that m any matters pertaining to the Borough Council the Council or its officers be approached to see if anything had been done in such matters before any letters are written to the Council. He thought that if such a course were taken it would avoid any friction.

Cr. W. Herring seconded the amendment. He thought the League had done a lot of good and could do more, but they knew that it was lack of finance and labour that was holding the Borough Council back. Cr. J. B. Kent said that he had not thought for a moment that the League would go into affairs that were the concern of other people. Every Councillor had agreed that they had misplaced their enthusiasm. Councillors had spoken of a “public snub,” but how many public snubs had the League given to people and local bodies? If they left the administration of the town to the people who were elected for the job by the ratepayers there would still be a Wide field for the enthusiasm of the League. Cr. H. Hutchinson agreed with Cr. McKay and supported the amendment. He added that if the League kept to its objective it could do a lot of good wQrk. Cr. Boustridge said he did not agree with the amendment or the motion/ The Council had a lot of letters from such bodies as the Automobile Association and the Blaketown Ratepayers’ Association asking it to do things which had already been put on the Council’s pro-, gramme. If they were going to ask the League to take the course suggested by Cr. McKay they should ask all the other bodies to do likewise. Cr. Harker: If a man can’t stand criticism he ought to get out! The Mayor (Mr. F. A. Kitchingham) said he would not like to administer a snub, but a tremendous amount of time had been wasted on account of the large number of matters raised which ’had already been dealt with by the Borough Council. There were still a tremendous number of people in Greymouth who did not know there was a war on—that did not refer particularly to the Progress League. Reasonable inquiry would have shown the League that the Council had no jurisdiction over the hotel conveniences or the Opera House conveniences, It appeared to him that the amendment would do no harm—asking the League to make full' inquiries before taking any action. It might be that now the matter had been talked over and would get a certain amount of publicity the object would be achieved without the necessity of forwarding a resolution. ’ Cr. Blanchfield said he did not think his resolution was a snub, The

League was now putting an inspector on to the hotels to see that they gave all the accommodation available dur-, ing the holidays when everyone knew that the hotels were short of staff and were advertising for staff over and over again without success. The League had harassed a man who had spent thousands of pounds in the town in rents and rates and had given freely to charity. In the interests of the people whose money the Council had put into the League the Council should tell the League its feelings in the matter. All 'he wanted was a courteous letter to the League putting the views he had expressed. The amendment was then put to the meeting and was lost, Crs. McKay, Hutchinson, Herring and the Mayor supporting it. The motion was also lost, Crs. Blanchfield, Stokes, Kent and Caldwell being the only ones in favour of it.-