The Northern Advocate Daily THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1937. AMALGAMATION OF LOCAL BODIES

Northern Advocate, 24 June 1937, Page 6

The Northern Advocate Daily

THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1937. AMALGAMATION OF LOCAL BODIES

K«Brl*tered for transmission throofli tbe post a* a Newspaper.

The conference of representatives of Northland local bodies and the Minister of Internal Affairs, which took place yesterday, was of a decidedly interesting nature, and, though no definite decision approving or condemning the proposals of the Local Bodies Amalgamation Schemes Bill introduced by the Minister was reached, the discussion of various phases ( of the amalgamation question must have a distinct educational value. The conference dealt primarily with two questions; the Minister’s Bill and a scheme of Northland amalgamation drafted bv the honorary

secretary of the North Auckland Counties’ Association. Eventually the conference passed a resolution: “That -the representatives of the local bodies north of the Waitemata County meet in conference to form themselves into committees to bring down proposed schemes of amalgamation for submission to the Minister of -Internal • Affairs within four months.” This means that the question of amalgamation of local bodies in Northland must be decided by the people interested, unless the Minister is invested

with tne compulsory power winch his Bill provides. The conference did not definitely adopt the scheme submitted by the honorary secretary of the North Auckland Counties Association, which provides for* the division of the existing counties into two counties —Northern and Midland. Local bodies within those counties would be allowed to remain as they are at the present time, their absorption into the counties being effected gradually as cir-

cumstances warranted. Though the scheme was not adopted, there is little doubt that it will form the foundation of any scheme or schemes evolved by the committees that are to be set up to submit a proposal to the Minister. Mr Parry made it quite plain that

the scheme was in accordance with his ideas, and he pronounced it the best attempt to solve a difficult problem that he had come in contact with. Our readers will be well acquainted with the details of the proposed constitution of Northern and Midland Counties in place of those which now exist, and they will await with interest the deliberations of the committees. It is needless to say that the quesion of the amalgamation of local bodies bristles with difficulties. Kecognition of this is provided in the fact that the question has been occupying public attention for the past forty years. Successive Governments have announced their intention to introduce legislation to bring about amalgamation, but nothing has been done, Mr Parry has. now grasped the nettle. He has drafted a Bill which, if passed into law, would allow of drastic amalgamations being made in the 1 Dominion. The general principles of the amalgamation of local bodies has been applauded, but the possible application of the provisions of the‘Bill to particular districts has had a less effusive reception. There has existed a doubt as to the ultimate objective of the Government. An attempt was made by the chairman of the Whangarei County Council at yesterday’s conference to ascertain whether the Government had complete nationalisation in view. Pressed by Mr Mac Kay to say whether it was the Government ’s intention to pursue a' policy of. progressive absorption of the functions of rural local bodies, the Minister declined to answer.on the ground that the question was a political one and should not be introduced at the conference. It is surely reasonable to assume that if it is,not the Government’s intention to pursue a policy of nationalisation the Minister would .have said so. His refusal to answer the question is .calculated to leave the impression that a scheme to nationalise the existing functions of local bodies is contemplated by the, government though it must be said in fairness that Mr Parry l is reported to have declared bn other occasions that such is not the intention of the Government.

1 Another point which has giveh rise to uncertainty on the part of local bodies is the attitude the Government woiild take if the Question 6f compulsory amalgamation were referred to the peoMr Parry gave an unequivocal reply =to a question on this subject addressed Jo him yesterwhen he stated that if a vote were taken itewould';- have the form of a national referendum, which, of means that the Parliamentary franchise, rather than the ratepayer franchise, would he used. This is a political question which will naturally create much opposition from those most vitally concerned. We feel that the conference should

have given the Minister a more definite lead in regard to his Bill. It would have done so 1 if it had voted upon a motion tabled by Mr Mac Kay to the effect that “This conference is prepared to consider any reasonable proposals which will preserve the rights and privileges of the ratepayers to the existing form of local government, but it is opposed to any form of compulsion.” This was not supported by other county councillors present and had to be withdrawn. That was hardly fair to i the Minister, who may be e:>| eused if he accepts the silence of the meeting as an indication that

the delegates would submit to compulsory amalgamations. However, taking everything into consideration, the conference must have served a useful purpose, for it will have given the people of Northland in particular, and of the Dominion in general, a better insight into the proposals of the Government and focussed attention upon various aspects of a thorny question.