THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS THURSDAY, MAY 5. 1938 LOCAL BODY ELECTIONS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 23029, 5 May 1938, Page 14

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS THURSDAY, MAY 5. 1938 LOCAL BODY ELECTIONS

Those who will direct local government in the next three years are to be chosen by vote next Wednesday. The scope of the elections is unusually wide, embracing city, borough and county councils, town, road, harbour and hospital boards. The functions all these bodies perform, and the funds drawn chiefly from local rates they administer, contribute so much to public welfare that every good citizen should be careful to cast his vote after due deliberation. That is his democratic privilege, his right and duty, and his opportunity to influence the course of local government. Given a full poll, there can be no serious cavil at the result. The people will have expressed their will on the issues as they judge them. Into these issues, unfortunately, has been imported one drawn from party politics by Labour. National issues should not intrude on and becloud local ones. Communities should be able to work together for the common good without division into parties and classes. Labour has already been responsible for introducing this factional schism . into some of Auckland's major local authorities and at the elections next week will seek to extend it to the smaller communities and . districts. Electors should resist the Labour offensive in city and suburbs, and on the harbour and hospital boards. Politics are not wanted at council and board tables. They are a hindrance rather than a help, a cause of friction and discord, as was clearly demonstrated at the Drainage Board's meeting yesterday. Efficient local government will best be obtained when every problem is examined from all angles and the solution adopted offering the most general benefit. Labour candidates are precluded from giving the community's business such impartial consideration. They are pledged in advance to the Labour Party's policy and so are bound to serve a section even at the expense of the whole. This is not mere assertion or theory. By the caucus system, the Labour Party is demonstrating the practice openly and consistently at the Town Hall and now, it appears, at the Drainage Board, thus dominating a metropolitan body. Mr. J. S. Stewart gave the whole show away yesterday by disclosing that "the Labour majority's decisions were always carried out on the board and the Labour members knew what they were going to do before they came to the board's meetings." Here is exposed a device whereby a majority of a majority party on the City .Council rules both city and suburbs on drainage matters. Thus eight Labour members would be able to impose their will on the council of 21, and the metropolitan board as well. Such a system makes a mock of the representative system and the democratic principle. Decisions in local government are supposed to rest on free discussion in open council. Labour substitutes discussion and decision in secret. Its members come to the council table tied to a majority of the party and with the business all cut and dried; Mr. Stewart openly admits it. So the council meetings, open to the publio and the press, are a farce, signifying nothing. There is no real debate because there is no free judgment. The mind of the majority has already been made up. The minority is powerless, unable to influence decisions on behalf of those it'was elected to represent. Thus a small coterie, working in secret, can dictate to council and community. The caucus system as practised by Labour in Auckland is not democratic, nor British, nor constitutional. It is a stratagem to usurp power and place it in the hands of the few. Electors can best show their resentment and distrust by rejecting the Labour manipulators at Wednesday's polls. At election meetings Labour candidates are making brave claims concerning their handling of the city's finances. Ratepayers should examine these claims narrowly. Sound finance has never previously been the mark of Labour administrations, here or elsewhere. Ratepayers do not need to be reminded that Labour has raised the rates to 4s 3£d in the pound—to more than 20 per cent of annual value. The increase has been made in good times when, as Labour boasts, it was able to collect a high proportion of current rates and also bring in arrears. It has also had the benefit of steadily rising valuations and smaller calls for relief. With all these advantages, Labour has not been able to reduce rates; instead they have been raised. Not only that, but Labour has augmented buoyant revenues by heavy borrowing reinforced with Government subsidies. When these various financial and economio aids are considered, Labour's financial record does not appear so economical. The soundness of increasing rates and of borrowing in good timeß may be questioned. Rather should civic resources be built up and conserved against contingencies. Labour candidates could plead, if they dared, that their expenditure was swollen by the effect of Government policies 1 in raising costs. In the current year : these will add another 2£d to rates for hospital levies alone. Much more , has to be spent to obtain the same service when Labour rules. Ratepayers have observed the trend and i no doubt will seek by their votes on , Wednesday to check the spending ; party. Fortunately they and electors generally have a most acceptable , alternative to party politics in local , government, to caucus rule, and mounting expenditure. The Citizens' Committee has put forward a group of candidates who are not tied to faction, representative of the whole community, and capable of directing and managing civic affairs jvjth economy and efficiency* ,