TOWN-PLANNING.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 10232, 15 August 1911, Page 1

TOWN-PLANNING.

PROBABLE FATE OF BILL,

MINISTER COUNSELS CAUTION. [Fxum Oxtr Correspondent.] WELLINGTON. August 14.

The action of the House of Representatives in committee on Friday mghi< in throwing out the clause giving the Governor-in-Council the power to reject a town planning scheme, has caused some speculation as to what the Hon 0. Powlds intends to do with the Bill, and in an interview with a " Lytteitou Times" reporter to-day he counselled delay. " ill view of the vote 111 the House 011 Friday night," lie said, "I .1111 of the opinion that it would be unwise to proceed further with the Bill in the absence of tho Prime Minister. 1 do not think tnat members generally understood the significance of the vote they cast on that occasion, although I did my best to point out that_ it amounted to a revolution in constitutional government. If given effect to in means the establishment of bureaucratic government in this country, which I. do not think was what they intended. Unless we propose an entire change in our system of government the Governor-iii-Oouncd must remain the supreme and fro a I authority in all national administrative acts. Under these circumstances I am not prepared to assume the responsibility for such a revolutionary change during the temporary absence of the Prune Minister. 'lmportant as I consider the question or passing the Town Planning Bill this session, the, delay of a year is, in my opinion, or much less moment than would be the acceptance without fuller consideration of tne radical alteration of our constitutional methods involved by the vote of Friday night. " The critics who have called the Town Planning Bill a ciudo production have only displayed their ignorance of the requirements of town planning legislation, and most of them have, at the same time, shown a great want of appreciation of the importance and urgency of the question. With the exception or a paragraph, which was unfortunately omitted by mistake from the printed copy of the Bill, and which I supplied 011 the Supplementary Order Paper as soon as its omission was pointed out to me. the Bill is about as perfect a piece of legislative machinery as any Parliament is likely to turn cut. Not only is that my opinion, but it is the opinion of some competent students of the subject who have examined the Bill. The main point objected to in the Bill, apart from the Governor-in-Oouncil, was the power conferred on Councils to raise the money without a poll of the ratepayers after the scheme of town planning "had received fnll consideration, and had been finally approved. Even in conservative England that is the law, and with the provisions for safeguarding all the interests concerned which my Bill provides, no possible harm could come from that provision. Without it I believe that town planning in New Zealand will continue to be only a name or a benevolent plank in party programmes for many years to come, and the real ratepayers, namely, the rent payers, will have to continue to live in miserable hovels and overcrowded slums. However, the country will now have further time to consider the whole question.