CATHEDRAL SQUARE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18380, 4 February 1928, Page 4

CATHEDRAL SQUARE.

To the Editor. Sir, —I have at all times been on the side of Labour, but the conduct of the present council has decided me never to vote for Labour again. It is a case of “putting a beggar on horseback and he will ride to the devil.” All the Labour members of the present council seem bent on misrepresenting and evading facts. Their cherished aims are to raise loans, no matter how, and to enter into large works without consulting the ratepayers. At the last meeting Councillor Carr made a wild statement which he must know* is not true. Referring to that thing in the Square he said “that the legal position had been cleared up, and it had been established that the council had rights over the Square.” In the face of the statute law bearing on the subject no person

could make such a statement. One would have thought after the snub these councillors deservedly received from the Board of Health they would have climbed down and adopted more rational methods, and not plunged deeper into the mire by' abusing the Board of Health for not being a partv to breaches of law and order. But it seems they will stop at nothing in order to get money and scatter it to the four winds. The “municipal market” is an example. If they' will throw away hundreds of pounds in order to carry out their silly* fads, this example will be repeated tenfold in Cathedral Square if they are not brought up with a round turn very soon. I challenge the Labour Party* to put this matter of illegally* spending £IO,OOO in the Square on usurped property to a vote of the ratepayers.- They will then get an eye-opener which will show conclusively* that the ratepayers will stoutly uphold the actions of the Board of Health by stopping their credit. Then again Councillor Armstrong is bold enough to say, “The Board of Health was adopting Star Chamber methods.” I think it will be conceded that the Board of Health are not bound to discuss all matters in public. Mr Armstrong would have been wise to have said nothing about “Star Chamber methods." for it has been painfully* illustrated that much of the business of the council is now con -acted in committee, which is “Star Chamber” methods. Was not Councillor Armstrong's picnic to Wellington arranged for in committee? Djd not the Mayor order that the question of loans for the Square and Papanui channelling be discussed in committee so that “private and semi-private people” should be kept in the dark, and was not that

bantling called a “muncipal market” conceived in committee, brought to life and adopted and established on a £IO,OOO section and the buildings actually* started before the thing was brought before the council? Was not that "Star Chamber methods.” and were we not deceived about the cost of the thing? We were told that the net cost would be only £378. Will Councillor Sullivan dare to say they have not exceeded that sum ? Why were not the particulars 'of expenditure brought before the council at its last meeting?—l am, etc., ANTI STAR CHAMBER.