REMOVAL OF HOUSEHOLD REFUSE.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIV, Issue 1188, 10 December 1924, Page 4

REMOVAL OF HOUSEHOLD REFUSE.

In accordance with a recent decision of the Borough Council the-town clerk has issued notices to householders informing them that, from January sth, 1925, their household rubbish will not be collected until the “regulation rubbish receptacle is placed within six feet of a gate opening on to a public street, and in a situation from which it can lie conveniently taken to be emptied into a dust cart.” Ju the event of non-compliance with this order tho householders will he obliged to deal with the refuse themselves. Surely, when the health committee ot the council framed this arbitrary recommendation, it could not have given much consideration to the welfare of the people in whose interest it is supposed to be acting. According to the proceedings of the council meeting which adopted the committee’s report, it was made clear that householders were to he asked to have the receptacles placed “within a reasonable distance of the gate l .” In defining subsequently a reasonable distance as six feet it would appear that the council lias acted in a most unfair manuer, and in refusing to collect rubbish unless the regulation is complied with is, in these summer days, paving the way for an outbreak of disease. The present age is essentially one in which most people take a delight in beautifying their surroundings, and naturally they are opposed to being compelled to place unsightly rubbish receptacles In their front gardens. Most of the houses in Palmerston North are built on quarter-acre, or smaller, sections, and it is grossly unfair for tlie council to hold a pistol to the people’s heads in the manner in which it is doing. At the council meeting referred to, it was stated that the regulation’was brought forward in the interests of economy, but the civic authorities could very well economise in other directions instead of this one. It was also stated by the Mayor that the practice to be adopted was in vogue in practically every other town in New Zealand, but that statement is open to question, for in Wellington the residents, it is stated, are not compelled to do as it is intended in Palmerston North. Wo doubt if ever before in the history of Palmerston North events have shown such all imperative need for a ratepayers’ and electors’ association to look after the interests of the people and, in the absence of a central body, the Hokowhitu Association could take this matter up with the council and seek to have such a retrograde step abandoned.