THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BILL.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XLVII, Issue XLVII, 8 May 1912, Page 6

THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BILL.

| Ul-' LOCAL BODIES. A i*i J (Jlis T.MENT OF DELEGATES. : —. ' I A meeting of representatives of local I bodies, convened by Mr. H. Baigent* i Chairman of the Hospital dnd Charitable Aid Board, at the request of the Minister, was held at the Council Chambers this morning to appoint two delegates to represent the district at .the conference to be held in Wellington on 21st inst. to discuss the Local Government BillOn the motion of Gi*. Sriodgrass Mr. H. Baigent was voted to the chair. The following local bodies Were represented County Councils : Waimea, Takaka, Murchison, Collingwood; Borough, Councils: Nelson, Richmond, Motueka ; Road Boards: Riwaka, Upper Moiitere. Stcke, Suburban North, Dovedale, Waimea West; Harbour Boards: Nelson and Motueka; Nelsoh Education Board. Over forty delegates from the various local bodies were present. Mr. S. Blomfield. County Clerk, read the authority for calling the.meeting. The .question was raised by Cr. Best. (Chairman Waimea- County Council) and Mr. Everett (Motueka Harbour Board) as .to whether the Hospital Board was a local bod}' within the meaning of the Act. • ■ * . Mr. Franklyn (Education Board) was of opinion that the Hospital and' : Charit- i able Aid Board was a legally constituted body. The .Chairman, in Teply to Cr. Hoult /Waimea County Council) ruled that the Charitable Aid Board was a recognised public body. The Chairman referred to. the vagueness existing as to the method of voting, and asked for the opinion of the meeting bri thp. subject". Cr. Fell (Nelson City Council) moved and Cr. Snodgrass seconded, that every delegate in the room have one vote. Cr. Baddock (Murchison County Council) said his countv was of Opinion that each-, body had only one vote, and consequently sent only one delegate. Cr". A. H. Barnett "(Takaka County Council) said he had been chosen to represent four bodies, and if he had only one vote it would be manifestly: unfair to those bodies which were not -directly represented. I ' ' v Mr.. Macmahon (Chairman Nelson Harbour .Board) .pointed out that several delegates represented ; more- than cne 'body. ' * . . : Mr ; Franklvn objected to the whole proceedings. as.- the "School Committees, which.' were local bodies, ha«i not been nodfied of the meetine. : He entered a solemn protest on their behalf, as they were very important local bodies. Mr. Field (Mayor cf Nelson) thought the motion was the only; way of getting over the difficulty. The matter phould have been discussed before the meeting, and a course of action decided upon. The motion was then put and. declared carried oii the voices. - _ Cr. Hampaon (Nelson City .'Council) understocd that the meeting was called to elect delegates, not to discuss the Bill. _ j Th'e Chairmah was of opinion that if the Bill wai hot discussed by the delegates it would not be out : the spirit of the Minister's notification. - Mr. Mavmahon agreed with Cr. Hamp- i Sl.in.. - - , ' • /■:.■■■ ; _M. H. Kenyon (Dovedale Road Board) j • though that tihe \';ews: of slintiid be made known before they could elect representatives. ■ The Mayor of Nelson was also of opi- i nion' that: the meeting was solely -^f or the j purpose of appointing delegates "■•to at-: tend the conference at Wellington. Mr. Franklyn agreed with the last speaker. He moved ihat the Chairman call for nominations, and- that those who were- nominated shou'd then>: explain their views to the meeting, after which a ballot':could be -taken. Mr. Everett seconded the- motion: pro forma. ' Most of the local bedies had discussed'.the. Bill, aud it seemed to him i futile to ask them tio go over the same | ground again. • , ■■-■•/ ■■--:■ I Cr. Fell "(City Coimcil) moved an I amendment that the meeting go on with i the business of electing two'delegates. The i various local bodies coiildi then- instruct.] those elected as to the various., matters ! affecting their particular body. ; Mr Macmahon seconded.the amendment,.l The.town and country interests should be i studied, and he suggested that a dele -• i gate be elected to represent each interest. " The Chairman was of opinion that.the i views of tha meeting should first be obtained before proceeding to the appoint-, delegates. - - Mr. Everett opposed the form of.\the amendment.- Tney should ascertain the -feelings of the conference. first, and then appoint! delegates to giye effect to the wishes of • the conference. In a personal explanation Cr. Fell '.said ihis amendment did not suggest any discussion or that directions should • be given to. the delegates appointed. Mr. Franklyn was of opinion that the town had .very little to- do with the Bill. country, was more affected, and should be given, more representation. Mr." Field shou!d_a«3d-: to his amendment Ltha.t one delegate be appointed. from the tow'-R-and one from the ;country representatives. Cr. \-Snodgrass thought the meeting should two men who were best able to represent -tbe whol© district. He strongly deprecatied': the talk of town ■ versus country interests. The : country s'hould certainly be represented, but those appointed should represent the~whole of i the bodies represented. . | i. Mr. Jas. Hunt (Mayor of Richmcrid) i was. of opinion that the country wanted a representative as \yell as the town. Mr. P. G. Moffatt (Motueka Borough : . Council) thought that while,the delegates appointed' should represent" morally the town and country interests, a wide view should b&.taken, and any delegates elected should be sent to represent not only t'he Nelson district 'but also the dominion. Mir. Coleman • deprecated raising the i cry ,of -town against the country. The i meeting should work in the interests of the whole community. Mr. Macmahon threw* out the suggestion : that those nominated should give ; their opinion, of the general principles of the Bill, after which; the ballot could be taken. ■ " - ' .

*1 "Mr. A. P. Allport (Stoke Road Board) was also of opinion that the broad views .of those nominated- should be made known before gding to election.' The amendment was then put and lost on the voices. . Mi;. Eyerett moved a. further amendment that the nomination of d«legates bfe J' i>ricd until an opportunity had been afforded the meeting to express an op: : ni.iji on"'the subject. Cr. Fell rose to "a point, of order, as tJwrr- w;:? (nothing in l-tie Minister's letter relating ti> a discussion of the Bill. " :\iv. that the meeting w;t.< 1» in «! bv no l nv. :md was simply a .- i.- you-pleass" affair. Tiiit'j hi*, feet, with a strong .expression of dii-appmval. j . <':ii«.:rrna:». ;fci' ,refenring to Cr. I-VH'.s 1.-.'ii't 'if -orilcr. contended that it was the duty -of the meeting to discus? >P.ill. then form their conclusions. He believed there were some local bodies which had not yet discussed the Bill.. _He ruled that the meeting could proceed with the discussion. Mr. N. Winn (Dovedale) seconded the amendment. Mr. Moffatt wanted to hear the views <.f the local bodies before making any seminations.

• The further amendment was lost, and the motion was carried. ±\OminauouS were called for, and were received as follows :—Messrs C. J. iiaruey, A. Allp-ort, and H. Baigent. •Several delegates refused nomination. . It was agreed that ■each candidate 'be allowed tell minutes to explain his views. \ In' effect, Mr. Everett thought that things should remain substantially as they were. _ Mr. Allport. after hearing Mr. Everett's views, obtained pc-:—^-;on to withdrew his nomination, as ha felt that the Road Board interests would be quite safe in Mr. Everett's hands. The Chairman said his opinion was that the various bodies as at present constituted could carry out the work of the district more economically than under the proposed provincial councils. To save the necessity of a ballot,, however, he asked .permission to withdraw his nomination. which was agreed to. The -Chairman then declared Messrs C. J. Harlev and H. Everett elected to represent Nelson at the conference in ■Wellington. j. . Mr. Everett, both on behalf of himself and Mr. Harley (who was absent owinr +~ '•"disposition) thanked the meeting Xui h;s -election. Cr. Snodgrass mentioned' that representations' should be made to the Conference that. Murchison should be "included in the Nelson district. , Mr, Everett said that from inquiries made, he had ascertained! • that the people of Murchison wanted to be included in the Nelson district. Cr. Baddock (Murchison County Council) moved that the meeting recommend that the county of Murchison be included in the Nelson -province. It was their wish to be so included.Mr. Macmahon seconded the motion, •which was carried. I A vote of thanks to the Chairman terminated the meeting. .