STILL IN DISPUTE

Greymouth Evening Star, 13 February 1947, Page 6

STILL IN DISPUTE

DISPOSAL OF WATERSIDERS' HALL ATTITUDE OF COMMISSION The ultimate disposal of the old watersiders’ hall, which became vacant with the construction of the new labour engagement bureau and hall at Greymouth by the Waterfront Industry Commission, is apparently still in doubt. The Greymouth Harbour Board had decided to sell the hall to the Railways Department, but it has been claimed by the Waterfront Commission, and the board, has been unable to reach finality.

At last evening’s meeting of the board a further letter was received from the general manager of the commission (Mr. A. E. Bockett). reouesting it to reconsider its decision to sell the hall to the Railways Department. He stated that the commission was not questioning the ownership of thb hall, but was surprised at the attitude of the board in seeking to evade the undertaking it had given to hand over the hall to the commission on the completion of the new building, which had cost over £lO,OOO and which was correctly a liability of the board. Mr. Bockett added that he understood that the Railways Department was not accepting the board’s offer until such time as the position was clarified. He also requested that the board should make a grant towards the cleaning, heating, lighting, and maintenance of the new building. Board Not Consulted. The chairman (Mr. E. W. Heenan) said that the relative Act set out that the board might make a grant towards a new building, but it was to be expected that if a grant was to be made the board would be consulted in regard to the plans, etc. In this case the board was not consulted in any way, and when he attended the opening ceremony he heard a watersider say that they were paying for it. In regard to cleaning, lighting, and heating, he (Mr. Heenan) could not see that the board came into it at all. The engineer (Mr. D. S. Kennedy) said he thought that when Mr. J. B. Kent was chairman of the board an ' indication was given that the board ' would continue to pay what it had been paying in respect to the old hall ’ (£l2 a month). (Mr. Kent was ab- : sent from last evening’s meeting.) Mr. J. J. Devine said he believed that, in the first place, the board had promised the old hall to the watersiders. The chairman: Yes, to be moved ’ on to another site. ' “I was a bit. surprised to see the deal with the railways,” said Mr.

Devine. Commission’s Property. The chairman said that the WaterI front Commission should not be contused with the watersiders. The new building was the property of the commission, and if the board was dealing with the watersiders, it would probably put a different complexion on the matter. In many ways the commission was a company. Personally, he was of the opinion that if the commission would accept the hall as the board’s grant towards the expenses mentioned, it would relieve the board of its hablMr.' W. Clayton asked whether it was correct that the Railways Department would not proceed with the transaction in the meantime. “I would think it possible that the commission has approached the department, as we have heard nothing more from the department, said the chairman. He added that they could not continue wrangling and must clear up the matter one way or the other.

Decision Deferred. Mr. Devine said he would be agreeable to the handing over of the hall to the commission if it would clear the board of future responsibility in regard to expenses. After further discussion on the question of the board’s responsibility to make a grant towards cleaning, heating, and lighting of the new building, it was decided to defe making a decision on the who question until the next meeting, the engineer to make inquiries as to the attitude of the Railways Department in the meantime.