POWER BOARD PERTURBED

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1077, 15 September 1930, Page 1

POWER BOARD PERTURBED

“ILLEGAL PAYMENTS TO COMMITTEES’’ REFUND FROM MEMBERS DEMANDED FORTIFIED with the opinion of the Solicitor -General th&t certain committees set np by the Waiteraata ElectricPower Board were unnecessary, and that “there was no authority ‘ for the board to make any payments to the members for attendance at the committee meetings,” the Audit Office is demanding refund of the amount. Hot words were used at a meeting of the board this morning when Mr. W. B. Darlow claimed that the Audit Office’s attitude was a vindication of accusations he recently made.

According to opinions expressed before the board this morning, there is no way of contesting the AuditorGeneral's demand. The committees concerned were set up to inquire into the position of unreticulated areas, the reticulation of certain districts, and the possibility of amalgamation of the Warkworth district with that of the board, “NOT REASONABLY NECESSARY” The letter from th Auditor-General said:—“l have to acknowledge receipt of your letter of August 18 conveying the board’s explanation of the circumstances in which the special committees were set up by the board. The papers were referred to the Soli-citor-General who, after considering the purposes for which the committees were set up and after reading their reports, is of the opinion, on the facts as submitted, that it was not reasonably necessary for such committees to consider any of the questions dealt with by them, and that as their setting up was in such circumstances unnecessary, there was no authority for the board to make any payments to the members for attendance thereat. The payments in question being therefore unlawfully made, the Audit Office is required to recover to the board's account the amount so paid, and, failing notification from you within 14 days of a satisfactory adjustment by refund, I regret that I shall have no option but to surcharge the members concerned with that amount.” “I want that letter read,” declared Mr. Daifiow when the chairman, Mr. G. Trevithick, moved that it should be received. “It siiould not be passed over without discussion as it is a result of accusations I made some months ago. It is a complete verification of my statements and. when this letter is published, the public w ill understand why a previous letter was not allowed to be made public.” “TAKEN ILLEGALLY”' At. a previous meeting, added Mr. Darlow, it had been said that the board could make a satisfactory explanation. The only satisfactory aspect, he said, was that the public would now know that money taken illegally from the public pocket would have to be refunded. “The only honourable course before the members is to resign/* declared Mr. Darlow. Mr. S. E. Kennings: A Darlow come to judgment! Or is it Darlow in the lions’ den? Mr. A. E. Greenslade wanted to know if any doubt as to the legality of procedure was expressed at the time. “No doubt was expressed,” he was assured by the chairman. Mr. H. A. Robertson said he had been in Australia at the time, but he was satisfied that the members, in setting up the committees, were convinced they were acting in the interests of the board. Even Mr. Darlow had been satisfied, apparently, for he had not objected then. Mr. Darlow: The late chairman, Mr. J. W. Hayden, moved that the committees should be set up. I was a new member. and thought I was among honourable members.

’ “That is no explanation, Mr. Darlow,” said the chairman. “You must i not attack members.” Mr. Darlow: In any case, T am supj ported by the Auditor-General. UNFAIR ATTITUDE lu the opinion of Mr. O. W. Marks ■ and Captain A. J. Algie, the Auditor- | General’s attitude sTiould be contested, if possible. Mr. Kennings said the attitude of Mr. Darlow and the Auditor- ; General was totally unfair to the ; board. In future, the members would j not be certain whether they would be 1 right or wrong in setting up commitj tees. j “If a single member can get up and ; support the formation of the committees, then attack them and receive j the support of the Auditor-General, ; something is totally wrong with the | way of public business,” observed Mr. ' Kennings. Mr. J. Mackie said it was evident that the Auditor-General had been prepared to take the statements of one man. These statements had not been true, Mr. Mackie said, and it would be desirable to have the judgment of an independent adviser. The legal side should be inquired into for the Solici-tor-General’s opinion was based on a biased report. “What affects the board is the inference that members have taken what should not be taken,” said Mr. W. R, T. Leighton. “The repayment of the money does not concern us.” The chairman said he was satisfied ' the committees had accomplished a reasonable amount of work and, what of additional importance, had gained a valuable knowledge of the district. “The members have no twinge of conscience,” he concluded. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS Legal advice on the plenary power* of the Auditor-General to surcharge members, secured on a question before the board on a previous occasion* was read. “The position is extraordinary,” the statement said. “The Legis- , lature has conferred on the Audit Office the right of forming an opinion. - upon a question which may involve difficult legal considerations and it has provided no form of appeal against the conclusions of the office. Whether the conclusions are right or wrong is immaterial. The essential fact is that, if the Audit Office has formed the opinion that moneys have been unlawfully expended, then, unless the case can be brought within some exceptions, there is no defence available to members of the board. Legislation of such a character is to be reprobated. It virtually deprives members of local bodies who give their time to the public service of the opportunity of having i the decision of the Audit Office re - I viewed by' the Courts.” I “It means that a member of anr board, if the Auditor-General cares to believe his case, can secure a judgment against that board.” remarked Mr. ; Kennings. The secretary-treasurer, Mr. A. Main, pointed out that, in the j present case, every member would be liable to surcharge, should the position ■ reach that stage, because no member had objected when the accounts were ; passed for payment. ) The letter was received.