THE SPORTSGROUND.

Taranaki Daily News, 21 December 1923, Page 5

THE SPORTSGROUND.

, COMMITTEE AND BOARD. RELATIONSHIP DEFINED. WORKING FOR ONE OBJECT. The relationship of the Sportsground Committee to the Pukekura Park Board was explained last night during the discussion on the launching of the q»teen carnival campaign for funds to assist the Park Board. It was made clear that the two bodies were part of each other, and that both worked for the common object of improving' the park. The discussion arose from a question as to what proportion the committee was to receive of any money that might be raised. “There is no difference between the Pukekura Park Board and the Sportsground Committee,” said Mr. J. McLeod (a member of the board). “The committee is part of the board and subsidiary to it, and both work for the one object. The board is the controlling authority.” He added that the committee had been given a lease of the ground for a certain number of years, for which it paid the board a peppercorn rental of £75 per annum the board in return employing a man on the ground three days a week. The committee’s aim was to improve the ground. When the time came to hand it back to the board and for the committee to dissolve, the board would have an asset which should return an annual revenue of between £5OO and £lOOO. Nobody was making any money out of the ground. Mr. C. E. Bellringer (ex-chairman of the board and now a member) said that he had moved the resolution which hqd brought the Sportsground Committee into being. The position was that, after the war, the board had been faced with the necessity of doing something to improve the ground, which was then in a bad state. The board had no money with which to do the work, and it had hit on the idea of inviting the co-operation of the various sports bodies. A committee had been appointed, and to them the board had handed over control of the ground for a period of years. The board had three representatives on the committee, which was subordinate to the board and had to - * report to it on many things. Mr. Bellringer referred to the great improvement the committee had made to the ground, and said that if the committee was in need of funds it was the board’s duty to extend help. As a matter of fact, the board was assisting the committee at the present time to erect a pavilion, but the money advanced would be returned. Just now, the board wanted money with which to carry on its work and the committee was coming to its assistance.

Mr. W. C. Weston (a member of the board) suggested that since the question had been raised it would be as well to announce the understanding which had been come to concerning the allocation of any money which might be realised by the carnival. He spoke highly of the work of the committee, asking what would tho ground be like at the present time had it not been for the energy and enthusiasm of the committee.

Mr. A. Humphries (chairman of the committee) said that it had been agreed that any sum raised up to £5OO would be handed to the board, while any money in excess of that sum would be halved if the committee desired it. There was no hard and fast rule. The committee might not want half, and if it did not the board would have the funds. In any case all the money would be spent on the park; the sportsground was part of the park and under the jurisdiction of the board. The Committee was out simply to improve it. Mr. G. E. Jago said that the public should be told that during the past two or three years the committee had spent over £BOO on the ground, which was now one of the attractions of New Plymouth.