MAYOR’S HONORARIUM.

Wairarapa Age, 17 March 1925, Page 5

MAYOR’S HONORARIUM.

ENTIRELY INADEQUATE. MANY SUGGESTIONS. A few candid remarks on presentday methods of local government were passed by members of the Masterton Borough Council when a Finance Committee recommendation to increase the incoming mayor’s honorarium from £2OO to £250 was unanimously agreed to. The Mayor (Mr PragneH) said that on retiring after four years in the mayoral chair he wished to voice the opinion that the amount at present was entirely inadequate for the time the mayor spent in the work of the borough. A man should not be out of pocket at the end of the term, and the incoming mayor would find that £250 would take all its time to meet expenses.

Cr. Temple, as the councillor with longest office, said it was disgraceful to expect a man to give his time up and receive such small compensation. The people could not expect a man to give the time for nothing, and reasonable people would not ask it. He had found Masterton one of the most selfish towns he had sepn from a civic standpoint, people thinking that a man had to give his time for no reward.

Cr. Russell: The council is responsible for fixing the mayor’s honorarium, not the people. Cr. Temple,: I say that the mayor should give 75 per cent of his time, and should be patd accordingly.

Cr. F. Petersen endorsed these remarks. He favoured a dual office if mayor-town clerk at a salary of £lOOO per year, an assisting accountant and less councillors. By this means they would get better service. Councillors should be paid as well as the mayor, otherwise they would not get the best men.

Cr. Watson’s idea was that the mayor should hold an entirely social position, and that a town business manager should be paid. The Mayor, in reply, said the honorarium was not given as payment for work, but merely to compensate the mayor for out-of-pocket expenses. In the sense of payment the mayor should not get any more than the councillors.