THE COLONIST. PUBLISHED DAILY NELSON, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1883 LOCAL GOVERNMENT REFORM.

Colonist, Volume XXVII, Issue 3778, 29 November 1883, Page 3

THE COLONIST. PUBLISHED DAILY NELSON, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1883 LOCAL GOVERNMENT REFORM.

; There was oneTemarkable coincidence between the proceedings of the representative Houses of the United Kingdom and of New Zealand in their lastsessions. In both the question of local government aud- finance- were discussed with great earnestness and at considerable length, and also in both the efforts of the Ministry were successful!? devoted to preventing any definite resolution being carried There was, however, this important difference in the treatment of the question. Mr Gladstone supported an amendment, which was adopted, affirming that relief should be granted to the rate payers in counties and boroughs "by the transfer to local authorities of the revenue proceeding from particular taxes or portions of taxes, and that a measure dealing with whole question of local taxation and local government is] most urgently required ; " whereas Major Atkinson was backed by a majority in affirming that our present centralising system is everything that can be desired, or in other words, as he has emphatically asserted on former occasions, that by the Counties' Act as much power is placed in the hands of the inhabitants of the several districts as they can, consistently with the public welfare, be entrusted with. Now, it surely exhibits a marvellously poor opinion of our colonists on the part of him who is now Premier, when he maintains that they are less capable of administering certain departments than the people of England to whom they are universally admitted to be on the average superior in energy, education, and intelligence, yet that indisputably is what the contention implies. To go no further, it is enough to point out three delicate and difficult matters —police, gaols, and lunatics—that are with us entirely managed in Wellington ; while the Imperial Government repudiates any suggestion of interfering further than, in consideration of the subsidies, there called subventions, voted by Parliament, the appointment of Inspectors to see that the establishments are properly conducted and the duties of all concerned efficiently discharged. Mr Gladstone spoke of centralisation " as the greatest of all evils, and the most menacing of all that threaten the country," so the question may well be asked when that is said by its foremost statesman in a country where so much is under the care of local bodies that'is here absorbed by central authority, what sound reason can there be for submitting at the bidding of any Minister to the maintenance of a state of things eminently unsatisfactory to the whole Colony ? So far then the arguments of those among us who advocate decentralisa 7 tion, and the foundation of some economical and efficient form of local government receive, powerful support. In the course of the. debate in the House of Commons there were condemnations of anything in the nature of our existing County system, as strong I as though the speakers had practical experience of its evils. Tt was pointed out that by the multiplication of governing bodies " confusion of arrangements" was created ; • " a scandalous, because unnecessary, burden was imposed on the ratepayers" ; and that " if the whole administration of ' local affairs could be deposited in one body, by reducing the number of establishments a great saving would be secured " This is an exact picture of the mischief inflicted on this Colony by our present form of so called local government. The most telling cry against provincialism was, that money was wasted and' uncertainty in action produced by two bodies having authority over the same subjects. The reform promised amounted to nothing more, when it came to be tried, than the revival of the dual system in another shape. What was predicted in :cthe

' House of Commons as sure to happen, if a somewhat similar scheme were accepted, is actually upon us here. What truer picture could there be of what has taken place since Coonty Councils took place in certain affairs of Provincial Governments than this, that if the Local Government Board were superseded by a County Board the control of this last over the local Boards " would be a great deal more unpopular." It is not then in the direction that New Zealand has been deluded into going that English reformers aim at proceeding. They seek, as those like minded in this Colony must and will do, to take away from the central Government every function that can be assigned to a local elective body, and to secure on equitable terms the complete separation of; general and local finance, such as Major AtkihsOti-has so' often stalked''about and done so little to make a reality on. any other terms than giving unlimited power of taxing themselves to-the various localities.. ~,, ~^..„ Among the many-interesting fea-. ture& of tthis ]ocal government - debatef'thiit itiay prt)'rlM>lybe rejected on for guidance here, was the- general , censure of subventions or subsidies as tending inevitablyl:-to the. increase-of the central authority's'" power. Throughout there was a general .expression of opinion .that 'the local ;bodies .should hot' only"have larger : duties to' perform, but that any tendency to extravagance, should have the check of public opinion by imposing .on -them,, A the .. responsibility of raising from such taxes'as might be allotted to them the necessary funds. Here it has long been manifest that one body taxed and another spent, the inducements to'economical administration vo were lost: ,•;•- Indeed, 'with the Ordinary weakness of human !nature, from which men' elected to •public offices can plead no exemption, the disposition is to scatter freely all the "money that, can be got hold of, even if debt is avoided, and to throw on the central body all the odium of insufficient means and excessive taxation. Thus on both sides of the world all experience is opposed to. a system of subsidies, and favors combining the disagreeable task of leyving taxes with the pleasant operation of disbursing them. Several of the most thoughtful of our. local government reformers have contended that it would be well, while relieving the General Government of the care of certain departments, to endow the local bodies "to which this charge should be transferred with the Property Tax, even going so far as to propose that while the assessment should, still be made under a central staff, the amount in the pound might be fixed by each district according to its wants and the willingness of the people to pay for their supply. This has something like a parallel in the suggestion of Mr Grey, who moved the amendment agreed to by the House of Commons, that a portion of the Income Tax should be allocated to the various local authorities. The underlying thought was given distinct^ expression .to by several speakers, and contradicted by hone: that the imposition of taxes for general objects ought not to fall on one description of property only. The original Act of Elizabeth, providing for the maintenance of the poor, directed that personal as well as real property should contribute. Such was also the basis of the English Land Tax when first levied: ' And though it was argued hy.:some 'that the proposal is impracticable/ our colonists are too well aware that 'for"' some j ears they have been made to pay- on -all they possess.;r Thus the scheme.of making the Property Tax local revenue is not so wild as some have described it, and obviously when imposed for purposes wherein all'are concerned, there is a fairness about it that does not exist in the case of rates. Local govern ment reform, may be delayed, but it cannot in-the-end be denied, and in the meantime the lessons of EnghVi opinion may assist in developing more correct views than could be derived from our own more limited experience. : :Ji;