The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. MONDAY, JUNE 11, 1923. MUNICIPAL SACRIFICES.

Southland Times, Issue 18964, 11 June 1923, Page 4

The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. MONDAY, JUNE 11, 1923. MUNICIPAL SACRIFICES.

When the Town Council meets on Tuesday evening it will have before it the menu provided by the Finance Committee for the sacrificial offering to that idol of the municipality—the Rates. It is the privilege of every burgess to grumble about the rates, and it is the habit of every newcomer to the council to talk glibly about reducing them, but the result over a term of years is invariably an increase, in spite of temporary reductions which are usually made at the expense of sacrificial offerings, which are often expensive. The new Finance Committee has not departed from custom. It has evolved for the Town Council a bill of fare which will enable it to feast its eyes on rate reductions and a pride of economies which will evidently save the ratepayers some hundreds of pounds! The committee’s report on the effect of the economies it proposes is worth quoting: If these amendments are approved: (a) The water rate will be 2d where used, and Id where not used, instead of 2.250 and 1.125 pence respectively, (b) Special interest rate will be 2.894 pence instead of 2.926 pence, (c) General rate will be 3.514 pence instead of 3.645 pence, (d) The total rates and fees collectable are estimated at £64,954 against £65,694 last year, equal to a reduction of £740.

The reduction in the rates and fees amounts to the stupendous sum of £740,, and this seems to have been secured by two heroic efforts. With one sweep of the pen, as it were, £5OO has been saved on the operations of the Public Works Committee. We do not know the actual items over which this £5OO has been spread, but if the reduction has been effected on any charges connected with the maintenance of roads, it is possible that the ratepayers actually are being saved nothing. If there is to be any skimping of necessary work in the application of this economy the town may actually suffer a loss. We hope to see something of a comprehensive road scheme shortly; but in the meantime any reduction of the sum available for the care of the streets is enough to cause anxiety. It is to be hoped that the Town Council will be sufficiently curious to find out exactly how this £5OO was cut out of the Public Works Committee estimates, and what particular items are affected by it. From the Finance Committee’s report it is to be gathered that the Public Library is to be shorn of £2OO and given small hope of a remission of rates amounting to £92. The Finance Committee’s interest in literature is impressive! The Invercargill Town Council should hang its head whenever its library is mentioned. For years, unlike other municipal authorities, it has rated the library and put endowment moneys into its coffers; for years it made ai) annual grant from library funds for which there was no authority, and since it assumed management of the institution it has actually contributed a little over £3OO, of which £2OO came last year. It is admitted that the representatives of the town once offered £250 to the library for a free reading-room, but the excuse now put up is that the old Athenaeum members did not accept it! The town has got its free reading-room and has taken more out of the library than it has put into it. In some centres library rates are struck; in Invercargill the town has won money from the library. Last year’s accounts show that the library required every penny of the money it could get for books, and this year the institution is to be asked to carry on with £2OO less if the town council remits the rates. This accounts for over £7OO of the economies and then we have a saving on the Waterworks Department, which is effected by the simple process of turning part of the Elec-

tricity Department’s surplus to the cost of pumping. It would be as well, too, if the public were given some information concerning the effect of cutting down the allocation for the Sandy Point Domain. It is to be hoped that this does not mean any slackening of the council’s interest in afforestation. The Finance Committee may have no such idea behind its recommendation, but the council should have more information than this report supplies before it accepts the reduced figures. In considering the report the town council will be well advised to proceed cautiously. The economies proposed may not be economies in practice, and they may represent actual losses; the reduction of expenditure is not necessarily economical.