UNION OF BOROUGHS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21359, 7 December 1932, Page 13

UNION OF BOROUGHS

MANY PROTESTS MADE POWERS OF " COMMISSION RIGHTS OF SMALLER BODIES # [BY TELEGRAPH —SPECIAL REPORTER] WELLING TON, Tuesday The necessity for establishing machinery for the amalgamation of local authorities was emphasised by the Minister of Internal Affairs, the Hon. A. Hamilton, during tljc Committee stages of the Municipal Corporations Bill in the House to-day-Many members took exception to a clause in the bill providing for the amalgamation of boroughs on the recommendation of a commission requisitioned by a poll of electors of any one of the boroughs. Both the Hospitals and Charitable Institutions Amendment Bill and the Fire Brigades Amendment Bill provide for similar amalgamations of local body areas, and it was suggested that an organised attempt was being made to rob local authorities of their democratic powers.

Carrying Suggestion Too Far The Minister said that the tenor of all the complaints he had heard in the House was that the Government should allow local bodies to decide their own fate. "That suggestion might easily be carried 100 far," said Mr. Hamilton. "In New Zealand ivc have a pronounced local body spirit, and in these days when on account of improved transport amalgamations could be made, it is increasingly difficult to bring them about. There is a general desire in the country for the amalgamation of local bodies. What wo have to decide upon is the method." According to the provisions of the bill, if one local body wished to join another, the Government would set up a commission to inquire into the circumstances and make a recommendation. Thus the people of tlio boroughs had two safeguards against ill-advised action—tho commission and then the Government. If it would meet the wishes of the House, lie was prepared to consider altering the bill so that the commission's report should be presented to and considered by Parliament, itself.

Mr. 11. S. S. Kyle (Government. —Riccarton) : That would bring Parliament down to the level of a local body. Desire for Amalgamation

Mr. W. J. Jordan (Labour —Manukau) asked if the establishment of a commission could not be made dependent on an aggregate majority vote in all the boroughs concerned. Mr. Hamilton : There is a general desire for amalgamation of local bodies, and it is agreed that this is a reasonable desire. Mr. A. J. Stallworthy (Government — Eden) : Up to a point. Mr. Hamilton: Let us try to got to that point. You have two safeguards and I offer Parliament as a third, I must emphasise that Parliament ought to stand up to its responsibility and see that the work is done. There is no "unseen hand" in this bill. It represents merely a desire to do something which is generally conceded to bo right and needful. Earlier in the debate on the short title Mr. F. W. Schramm (Labour—Auckland East) said hp had been authorised by the Mayor and councillors of the Borough of Newmarket to say that they opposed the clause strongly. Newmarket could bo included in." Auckland merely by a poll of electors of the city, and the other surrounding boroughs were in exactly the same position. He admitted that the clause might have been approved by the four centres of the Dominion, but it was certainly not in the interests of the boroughs which lay about them.

Mr. Stallworthy said that if the law was passed, it. was competent for the City of Auckland to carry a poll and absorb Mount Eden, although in a recent poll the ratepayers of Mount Eden had objected to an amalgamation. He had received a telegram from the Mayor of Mount Eden opposing the clause.

Other Protests Received Mr. Jordan said that the clause empowered one local body, which might be relatively small, to bring in all the other larger local bodies adjacent to it. " We seem to be doing this all the time in Parliament," continued. Mr. Jordan. "Arc we going to clip down our local government and then do away with Parliament?" He suggested that if one of two bodies wanted to amalgamate, polls should be taken in both. Mr. A. S. Richards (Labour —Roskill) said he had received protests from the Mayors of Mount Eden and Mount Albert and from the chairman of the Mount Roskill Road Board. After the Minister had replied, Mr. 11. T. Armstrong (Labour —Avon) said that the linking of local bodies was long overdue, and that as far as the bill went in that direction, he welcomed it. " Certain little Mayors have been the uncrowned kings of their boroughs, and they don't want to remove their crowns," he said. "We should not wait for every little borough to have its say when it will amalgamate in the interests of municipal welfare and the saving of public money:' This bill does not go so far to force local bodies to come together as it should. Mr. Stallworthy said the clause would tend to break down the representative principle of constitutional government. In making an attack on a system of representative government which had been devised after many years of experience the Government was doing a, very unwise tiling. Mr. Hamilton said he was quite prepared to accept reasonable amendments. He could see there was a lot of objection to the clause, but at the same time he thought there, was a good deal to be said in favour of it. No one recognised better than the Government the good work of local bodies. He realised the advisability of getting people to agree to amalgamation of their own free will, but there were times when it might be desirable to exert some pressure.