ARMSTRONGJONES STAKES,

Star (Christchurch), Issue 19034, 1 April 1930, Page 8

ARMSTRONG—JONES STAKES,

The City Fathers

A Fortnightly Review. By Bernice Shackleton. JT WAS Councillor Thacker who first reminded the council (they pretended to need the reminder) last night of what he termed “The Jones Armstrong Stakes, sir.’” Councillor Beanland will give up one hour of his time to-day to a town planning inquiry, the rest he devotes to the contest. He is generous. The Mayor achieved a studied carelessness as to the events of the day, an indifference that was meant to suggest that he has no qualms. Indeed he* threw in his casting vote with such a superb insouciance, he even stated quite nonchalantly that “it goes without saying,”—the vote and the poll. And such was the state of the council that everything hung on the Mayor’s casting vote, except when Mrs Fraer, her womanly sympathy recently touched by the tales of the unemployed, deserted the ranks of the advocates of private enterprise in the hope that public enterprise might find work for more men. But the Mayor was so certain that councillors voted by 'parties that he was inclined to overlook this unfamiliar independence.

In the Limelight. The debaters of public versus private enterprise had a long innings. Each side was conscious of the crowded gallery. True, Councillor Armstrong was getting rather restive •on the question of the forty hour week. He wonders how they are treating his tender child in committee, but in spite of his parental fears he was told very sternly to await the committees report. They were looking into the matter. After all, things in that direction are just progressing as well as can be expected. At every forty hour outbreak Councillor Armstrong was well and truly muzzled. For the favourites in this race are Public Enterprise” and “Private Enterprise. Around the council table the odds appear fairly even; the situation is so uncertain that' the interested parties might be forgiven if they lose a little of their—l hesitate to sav their customary sang-froid, for some are easily ruffled; but at any rate there ought to be some legend of cooL level headedness. A Matter of Taste. Youth was ever the worst offender, but last night even the Mayor had to remind Councillor Armstrong that reference to a councillor’s private occupation was “a matter of taste.” The by-laws did not actually forbid it, mind you, still it was a matter of taste. . , , It is understood that there must have been cause for this remark. Councillor Beanland had delivered some very sound argument on the matter of contracting and tendering relative to the Radley Bridge. Labour was inclined to congratulate itself because former work had been done below contract price. “An estimate that is too high,” argued Councillor Beanland, “is as bad as an estimate that is too low, because it prevents other work being carried out.” Neither did he see that they should waste the ratepayers’ money simply to keep a few extra men employed bv day labour. 'Councillor Williamson added amazing figures to this argument. If the work on the Carlton Bridge done by the city engineer had been carried out by a private engineer that engineer had estimated a saving of 100 per cent. “One hundred per cent? “Not one hundred* Councillor William* son.” >t “You mean fifty. No one believed him, but hey stuck to nis point. ~ “I say one hundred per cent. Ihe city engineer’s estimate was £BOOO, the private engineer’s was £4000.”

Councillors’ Occupations. Councillor Armstrong stood this for a while and then ho burst forth. “The only ones defending private contracting are the contractors themselves.” But I shall not repeat all he said, for you see it is “a matter of taste.” When Councillor Armstrong wishes to refer to a councillor's occupation he tries other tactics. He is not a contractor or interested in contracting, but he is interested in not letting the other side get away with it. He did say something about the bad taste of certain councillors, but the Mayor interposed, “Excuse me, I made no mention of quality. I said a matter of taste.” “The difference between tweedle-dum ana tweedle-dee,” said Councillor Lyons. At this stage there almost developed an argument as to who got the most pleasure out of frustrating the other. The advocates of private enterprise at the council’s failures, or the Mayor -when he gleefully gave his casting vote. Councillor Sullivan: “It’s a poor heart who never rejoices.” Councillor Lyons: “And there was a smile on the face of the tiger.” Councillor Andrews: “And a growl in the voice of the lion.”

Coats for Princes. See what children they are In logical strain Councillor Andrews argued (they are considering tenders for bridges, I would remind you) “I might go to two tailors to get an estimate for a suit. One will charge me £lO. another ~5. Of course 1 might take the £5 suit, but I would not be seen wearing it, not even if it were Councillor Cooke’s.” Councillor Cooke is the chairman of the Works Committee and his pride and financial reputation have suffered this night, now he smarts afresh. “I have made coats for princes,” retorts the Socialist in heat. Wherein lies the virtue in a prince’s coat to a Cooke? Councillor Andrews: “Were they red ones?” , t Councillor Cooke: “I never made bags for sausages.”—Not a Cooke then. The same sort of argument went on between the reputed representatives of the workers and the guardians of the ratepayers’ money over the question of roads.

A Fresh Voice. Councillor Sullivan grieves because the council gets no credit for its good work, its good work being Colombo Street nine miles of Colombo Street, which the Tramway Board had had some part in. Councillors described their meanderings about the streets of Christchurch. Labour had found it very unpleasant going over roads done by private enterprise: their opponents had visions of climbing over some of the municipal jobs. A new feature in the debate was tnat Councillor E. Parlane thumped out a speech to a sort of Morse code accompaniment on the table. He had taken an excursion round a few buildings, he left us in the dark as to which buildings; but he contributed nothing to the argument. Still it is pleasant to hear a fresh voice. After all, perhaps Councillor Cooke is right. Road making must be in its infancy or else the council’s policy is puerile. It was not till ten o’clock that they abandoned this track and began to think about putting money into Tattersall’s, but by this time the public were beginning to feel that they had had enough.