£80,000 WHARF HALL PROJECT IS OPPOSED

Greymouth Evening Star, 23 September 1949, Page 3

£80,000 WHARF HALL PROJECT IS OPPOSED

WELLINGTON, September . 22 (P.A.). —The proposed: expenditure of £BO,OOO to build a hall for waterside workers in Lyttelton—described by the Opposition as a “palace”—was again bitterly discussed on party lines by the House of Representatives this evening. The Minister of Labour (Mr A. McLagan) said that the present plans were those of the Lyttelton Harbour Board, which had refused to modify them, although asked to do so by the building s|ub-committee. Mr McLagan said that no objection had been, raised to granting . a £60,000 permit for a club in Hamilton. Mr J. K. McAlpine (Opposition, Selwyn), speaking as a member and a former chairman of the Lyttelton Harbour Board, said he agreed that the Coronation Hall at Lyttelton was appalling and ought to be replaced. “But it ought not to be replaced with a palace,” he added. It was unreasonable that while hundreds of people were homeless in Canterbury a. steel and concrete palace should be put up, he said. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr S. G. Holland) said it had to be remembered that New Zealand’s) shipping turn-round was the slowest in the world, and discontent was rife in almost all major ports. Under the existing law the. Harbour Board would have to go to the ratepayers to seek permission to raise a loan of' £80,00.0. “We are taking away from the people the right to decide this issue by ballot,” he said. Present Hall “Appalling” The present building was appalling, Mr Holland continued, and conditions were unfit for workers and almost disgraceful. The watersiders at Lyttelton were certainly entitled to far more amenities than they now possessed. No one, however, could justify the spending of £BO,OOO on the new building which was pro-, posed. “People are living in. tents and caravans,” said Mr. Holland. “Are we going to authorise the using of all this concrete and steel while people are living like that?” Mr Holland added that half ,the amount of money now proposed seemed to him to be more than ample. If he had his way, the board should be allowed to build at present only the lower floor of the proposed building. “Cannot we say to the Harbour Board, as we did to the Christchurch Tramways Board: ‘You are asking too much’? There is surely a middle course. I hope every person who is short of a home is listening to this debate.”

The Minister of Education (Mr T. H. McCombs) said it should be remembered that no outcry had been raised about the Combined Services’ Club, to cost £63,000, in Hamilton. What was right for one section was right for another. Mr S. W. Smith (Opposition, Hobson): Returned servicemen are entitled to some privileges. Mr McCombs suggested that it w’ould be reasonable for the House to pass the Bill, and then for the board to consider what had been said on both sides .of the house, and, if possible and desirable, to consider some .modification of the building. Army Huts For Schools When the Bill came to the committee stages, Mr Smith said that the proposal to put up such a palatial building just, did not make sense. He would support any move to reduce the vote.

Mr M. H. Oram (Opposition, Manawatu) : Schools have to make do with Army huts. Mr -Smith continued that school and hospital buildings were at a premium, and the House had to decide what should be given preference.. The Bill was still in the committee stages when the debate was interrupted at the adjournment.,