THE PROPOSED TOWN HALL.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18898, 26 June 1923, Page 4

THE PROPOSED TOWN HALL.

TO THE EDITOR Sir, — From whatever angle the _ question of the proposed Town Hall is viewed, it is a mistake to ask the ratepayers to vote for the construction of it at present. Take the labour viewpoint. Although in previous winters we have had the, menace of unemployment, ibis winter we are free from it, simply on account of the large number employed by the City Corporation in flood prevention works in the Leith and elsewhere. This work will go on for, a long time, and will absorb all surplus labour. Then on top of this, we shall soon be requiring labour for our Exhibition. This may necessitate., and probably will, an influx of outside labourers, but where those are to be housed is a problem which will require to be faced. If ilte City Corporation has money, to spend, it would be hotter to spend it on solving this problem instead of adding to the difficulties of solution by drawing more people into the city In work on the town hall building. The £90,000 proposed to bo borrowed and spent on the town hall—which, after all, would be largely non-revenue producing, and therefore a burden on the taxpayers—would be far more profitably spent on buildinc homes for our workers, and this expenditure would be paying interest on the capital invested, and therefore impose no burden on the ratepayers. It would be more sensible to ask the ratepayers io vote on the Town Hall proposal after we have finished with our necessary drainage and our Exhibition. When these have been completed a large part, of the labour, whieh had boon engaged on them could he absorbed in building a- Towp Hall, and if this poliry were adopted there would hot be such a large congestion of the labour .market in the city at one time as wi; result if the Town Hall is gone on with now. with the inevitable result that when all these works ore completed we will have a largo army of unemployed with no work to absorb them. The more works in progress at one time the bigger the slump would be when it came. Then, is it a wise policy at the present time, with the large amount of unavoidable expenditure entailed in flood prevention 'measures, to spend £90.000 on such a proposal, which will be an additional burden on the ratepayers? Personally, I think not.

The city councillors made a, mistake in deciding to take a vote just now, and if the proposal is defeated—as I expect it will be—it should not he taken as an indication that the ratepayers do not desire a Town Hail which will, he a credit to Dunedin. Rather say that the decision wag that the time is inopportune to go on with this work. I am, cto., R. Ferguson.