WORKS STAFF

Southland Times, Issue 21770, 27 July 1932, Page 8

WORKS STAFF

CITY COUNCIL S REDUCTION BY QUARTER PROPOSED FURTHER DISCUSSION A clause in the Works Committee’s report dealing with loan moneys available for keeping men employed in the works department provoked some discussion at last evening's meeting of the City Council. The clause read as follows: “Having fully considered the direction from the council that the committee investigate the matter of loan moneys available for keeping men employed in the works department. The committee has to report that the total cash available is £3184 and full provision has already been made for spending this amount in the year’s plan of works. The balance of unemployment loan No. 3 will be required to meet such charges as supervision, tools, etc., it connection with work under Scheme No. 5. Additional works therefore cannot be undertaken without raising further moneys. Recommend that approximately one quarter of the casual labourers in the Streets Works Department be dismissed and that the remaining men be given, as far as possible, three weeks’ work in every four.” His Worship said that when he had presented the estimates he had stated that there was approximately £12,000 available for the relief of unemployment. It would seem, however, from the clause in the commitee’s report that there was only £3OOO odd directly available. Nevertheless he considered that it should be possible to make use of other loan moneys to relieve unemployment. It seemed that there was going to be very little work offering except under No. 5 scheme. There was quite a lot of money which, though at present earmarked, could be used to provide work for the council’s men. Some of the money was not yet raised, but that could easily be got over by raising the money. His Worship referred" councillors to a report of the engineer on the amount available from the various loans for expenditure to assist employment. He read the concluding paragraph which was as follows: “It will therefore be seen that the sums of £llll (kerbing and channelling, P.W. loan 1919) and £4048 (consolidated loans) are the only ones that can be regarded as being capable of being dealt with. About this time last year a great deal of time was spent in investigation as to where footpath, etc., work could advantageously be done, with the result that no work of magnitude could be suggested as being warranted merely to create work. Since then continuous work is in hand in doing such work of footpath and drainage as circumstances call for. As these amounts constitute our whole available resources for such work, it seems necessary that they should be husbanded and expended only on work that is really needed. The proportion of direct labour involved in footpath and kerbing construction is not large.” “From what I hear there are a good many people who will not agree with what the engineer says regarding footpaths. Complaints are frequently made that the footpaths badly need repairing,” said the Mayor. “The loan money referred to has to be used for footpath construction, not maintenance,” said Councillor Imlay. “There is plenty of construction work needed,” said the Mayor. Councillor Ball questioned this. He said there were already too many footpaths constructed. Councillor Denham said that a city of the size of Invercargill should surely be able to find full-time work for all the men involved. There were many unsatisfactory footpaths in the city. Could not these be repaired? He was strongly opposed to the dismissal of any of the labourers. The Government had asked all local bodies to keep on as many men as possible. The Mayor drew attention to the latter part of the clause under discussion. The council had at a previous meeting passed a resolution rationing 26 men. According to the Standing Orders it would be necessary to rescind that motion before the present clause could be carried.

Councillor Imlay, referring to Councillor Denham’s remarks, said that the number of men the council was able to employ was determined by the money available. The men themselves had preferred that a quarter of their number should be dismissed rather than that half be rationed.

The Mayor returned to his point of order and ruled that the clause could not be dealt with until notice of motion to rescind the previous resolution was given. He said that had the earlier resolution been more elastic he might have been able to rule otherwise; as it was he had no option. There was a brief discussion on the Mayor’s ruling, but his Worship remained firm.

During the discussion Councillor Ball said that there was neither the work nor the money for the 26 men. After Councillor McKenzie had urged that the full 26 be retained, Councillor Gilkison said he would freely and without any ill-feeling offer Councillor McKenzie his seat on the works commtitee if he thought he could do more for the men. “There is no monopoly of sympathy for the workers at this council table,” said Councillor Gilkison. “But it has to be remembered that we are trustees for 4000 ratepayers.”