Paid Councillors.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXIV, Issue 927, 23 November 1933, Page 10

Paid Councillors.

Dear Sir, —It is not surprising to find the Mayor of Christchurch in sympathy with the proposal, emanating from the north, to compensate members of local bodies for the services they might render Mr Sullivan informs us that the case of payment for services rendered by city councillors can be verified. Assuming that his statement is correct,, it would not come as a shock to find Mr Sullivan, if payment was decided upon, advocating extra allowance lor JJeputy-Mayors, which, in his case, might be considered warranted because of the fact that the Deputy-Mayor docs a considerable proportion of the Mayor’s duties. But, all things considered, the “one man one job” rule would fit that case to the benefit of the electors. Although it is very discouraging to me, a Labour supporter, to find our Mayor not willing that our representatives should s?™ us without remuneration, I am, at the same time, offered consolation in the fact that if all public positions are, in future, to be converted from that of prestige to the stipendiary categor3*, it will open the way for more suitable persons as representatives for the classes. In fact, the opportunity for independents or a party of new origin, pledged to refuse anv remuneration whatever would, I feel sure, prove to be extremely popular with electors of every denomination. Regarding the present Mayor of Christchurch : Obviously he overlooks the fact that my family and, I believe, numerous other families in Christchurch, did not vote for Dan Sullivan because they valued his ability—being staunch to their Labour principles accounted for the majority obtained by the Mayor at the last election | The proverb: “None are so blind as those who refuse to see" is being forced upon me, and methinks unless new blood floods the ranks of the Labour Party mv support of that party must be seriously reconsidered.—l am, etc, B. AHLFELD.