LOCAL GOVERNMENT

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21546, 18 July 1933, Page 14

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

AMALGAMATION QUESTION COSTS OF ADMINISTRATION Mr. S. Donaldson, Mayor of Newmarket, writes:—lt is gratifying to learn that Dr. Noale lias been so closely associated with the compilation of the Local Authorities 1 Handbook, It will servo to strengthen my argument, for Dr. Neale can hardly question the figures taken from what is virtually his own publication. My statement that amalgamations in this country havo been unsuccessful from the viewpoint of economy, is undoubtedly supported by a review of administrative cbsts before and after unification. Spaco will not permit me to deal with this subject in extenso, but I feel sure that tho figures quoted will be sufficient to establish my contention. In the case of the amalgamation of Grey Lynn and Reinuera with the City, tho administrative costs of each body prior to union are shown in the Handbook as follows: —City, £16,586; Grey Lynn, £442; Remuera, £1206; a total of £18,234, whereas the sum of £20,290 is shown as the administrative cost of the unified body during the year following. Prior to tho amalgamation of Eden Terrace, tho figures were:—City. £20.290, Eden Terrace, £339. a total of £20,629, while £21,650 is shown as the figure for the following year. Moreover, the administrative salaries of tho Auckland City Council are shown for the year 1920-21 at £17,746, and in 1928-29 at £62.393, a striking increase of £44,567. (In tho 1933 Handbook salaries are shown as £71,895 or 8.7(3 of revenuo and 7.40 per cent of payments'.) Between 1920-21 and 1928-29 the City extended its area by the amalgamation of three suburban authorities (Point Chevalier, Avondale and Tamaki), the aggregate administrative salaries of which did not exceed £SOOO per annum, a figure which docs not account for the difference of £44,567. A perusal of the handbook indicates that the position in Wellington is analagous to that in Auckland and, in most cases, the cost of administering tho unified body has been greater than in the case of the separate entities, prior to unification. Tho failure of amalgamation to achieve economy is strikingly exemplified by tho position in Australia, where the one unified city. Greater Brisbane, was created in 1924 by the absorption of 19 separate authorities. After eight years' experience of this type of government, it is authoritatively stated that 90 per cent of the pooplo of Brisbane would retract and return to tho old system of separate municipalities if the opportunity presented itself. This statement is supported by the experience of Hamilton, one of tiie suburban municipalities included in tho unification scheme. In the year prior to amalgamation, tho rates levied in Hamilton totalled £32,248, while tho sum of £89,797 was extracted from tho ratepayers of this particular area by the Greater Brisbane Council during the past rating year. As tho majority of the suburban districts have experienced similar rate increases, the strong feeling evident in Brisbane against unification is understandable. A further striking argument against tho amalgamation theory is to be found in a comparison of tho rating levels in tho main Australian capital cities, whero, in each case, the basis is .unimproved value. Brisbane (unified city covering 245,000 acres) levies a rate of 10.5 d in tho pound; Sydney (federated city, area 3244 acres), 3.5 d in tho pound; Melbourne (federated city, area 7555 acres), 3d in in the pound; Adelaide (federated city. 3700 acres), 3.26 d in the pound. These figures clearly indicate that thoro is

little or no relationship between size and economy in metropolitan government. Dr. Neale will note that in my referenco to tho metropolitan areas of Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaido the word "municipalities" was used. In tho three cities referred to, there aro more than 100 municipalities (56 in Sydney alone), while, to quote Dr. Neale's own figures, there are 122 municipalities (boroughs and cities) in the Dominion of Now Zealand.