Page 3 Advertisements Column 7

Taranaki Daily News, 3 May 1933, Page 3

LOCAL BODY ELECTIONS. RATEPAYERS’ ASSOCIATION. The “Combined” Ratepayers’ Association.—lt is a peculiar, yet patent, fact that since the 1931 elections that body slept the sleep of old Gaspard for two years. Now it has awakened, but I believe that the citizens of this town also have awakened. If that body had been genuinely inspired and properly functioning in the majority interest, should it not have been astir throughout the whole time, week by week ? My supporters belong to no organisation: they are Householders and Ratepayers walking abroad, disinterested and unattached to any special section. HOSPITAL. I have been a member of the Taranaki Hospital Board on and off since 1915 for between 15 and 20 years, and I am proud of the fact that on many occasions I have been returned at the head of the poll in respect thereto. My work for that body must speak for itself.. The fact that the Hospital Levy is less this year will be appreciated in its proper light when the admissions and operations for the past three years are studied: Admissions. 1931 2014 1932 2179 1933 2421 Operations. 1931 1268 1932 1490 1933 1564 Since two-thirds of the operations in that institution were conducted by the Superintendent (Dr. Rich), or over 1090, and since otherwise the cost of an operation is (say) £3O to £5O or more if done privately, it is apparent what public good is being done , in that field of endeavour. With increased demand for charitable aid and increased services and costs (exchange), the fact that the Hospital Board was able to reduce its levy this year is a matter of congratulation. SURPRISING FIGURES. In 1915 the capital valuation of the Borough, was £1,538,471, and the rates levied thereon £16,442. In 1932-1933 the valuation had risen to £4,936,609, or more than three times that of 1915. The rates, however, reached the enormous sum of £81,900 —or FIVE times the rates of" 1915, and equivalent to £5 per head of the present population! The amount of borrowed money is strangling the ratepayers.' In 1915, £222,468 was outstanding. By 1933 it had jumped to £942,132—fr0m the equivalent of £l3 per head of the population to £55 per head of the increased present population. Is there not room for economy ? Is this, on the face of things, the fruit of economy ? SALARIES PAID. Then, again, here are the salaries paid in the various departments (a total of £28,000, increased to about £31,000 if the tramway staff is added):— £ s d Engineers’ Department 1900 18 0 General Staff of roads and other works 9358 19 10 Tramways Office 1010 14 0 Chief Inspector 337 10 0 Electricity Department 11,928 19 5 Town. Clerk’s Department and Treasurer’s Department .. 3064 4 0 The individual salaries of heads of departments (all having been reduced 10 per cent.) are:— Town Clerk £675 And Borough Solicitor ....... £225 Engineer £540 Tramways Manager £472 Borough Treasurer £450 Tramways Foreman £327 Chief Inspector £337 £3566 Is not the cost of Motor Vehicles ex-" cessive—l6 vehicles of *the Electricity Department each using 380 gallons of petrol per annum ? Electric Department. Motor-cars 2 Meter Readers’ Cars 2 Rimabouts for Servicemen ......... 2 Other Lorries of various sizes ..... 10 Total Vehicles 16 £ s d Cost of Benzine, one year ..... 592 4 2 Tyres, one year 178 17 5 Spares for Repairs 407 7 3 Labour 220 0 0 Total cost of running ... 1398 8 10 Motor vehicles and Road Rollers used by the Engineers’ Department, and the costs of working them for one year, 19321933, are as follow:— £ s d No. 1 White Motor-lorry 414 4 7 No. 2 White Motor-lorry ...... 445 3 5 No. 3 White Motor-lorry ...... 435 16 3 Dennis ....... 439 18 1 Vulcan (in use part time) .... 64 8 2 Bedford Lorry 377 18 4 2-Ton Motor Roller 51 15 2 8-Ton Motor Roller ........... 258 3 4 Ford Lorry 413 19 6 Engineer’s Car 159 7 3 Foreman’s Car 133 8 0 £3344 2 1 Those figures include all costs of operation excepting wages in the case of the two cars. Finally, I wish to be fair. I wish also to say that I do not belittle such services as have been rendered by the Mayor and Councillors singly and wholly in the public interest; rather do I pay them tribute. But there is room for much improvement, especially in economising and tackling matters from the correct point of view—always, always “What is in the best interests of the majority of the public ? What would the public sanction and approve? What is fair, British and democratic?” By that standard I wish my actions to be judged now and in the future. The decision is in your hands. E. GILMOUR. QOME days ago Mr. Griffiths stated Starvation did not exist in your Town. His inability at that time to see this fact, obvious to Social Workers, must be due to his range of vision and interest not reaching the poor and needy. ■Support E. GILMOUR.