HEALTH, SANITARY, AND BUILDING INSPECTION

Chronicle (Levin), 31 May 1947, Page 4

HEALTH, SANITARY, AND BUILDING INSPECTION

Local Bodies Discuss Scheme \ In Horowhenua Health, sanitation and building inspection were considered by representatives of district local bodies at a conference in Levin on Wednesday night. It was eonvened following recent advice from the Health Department that the assessments on local bodies for the service rendered by the health inspector, would be increased from 9d to; lOd per head of population for boroughs and from 4£d to 7d for the county. Those present were: The Mayor (Mr. H. B. Burdekin), Crs. D. J. ,'Gardiher and F. D. Chainey and town clerk (Mr., H. L. Jenkins), Of the Levin Borough Council; the Mayor (Mr. C. F. Atmore) , Cr. E. J. Cook and town plerk (Mr. Alex. Wilson), Otaki Borough Council; the Mayor (Mr. R. E., Downes) and town clerk • (Mr. J. T. Bovis), Shannon Borough Council; the Deputy Mayor (Mr. S. Small), Cr. D. D. McKenzie and town clerk (Mr. W. Trueman), Foxton Borough Council; and Crs. A. M. Colquhoun, J. H. P. Liggins, W. G. Taylor and county clerk (Mr. F. H. Hudson) , Horowhenua County Council. Mr. Burdekin presided and briefly explained the steps leading up to the conference. He went on to say that the health inspector (Mr. W. J. Guinan) had that day discuSsed the subject with the Health Department. The rulihg of the department was, that it would riot allow its officerUo extend the existing service in the boroughs and the Horowhenua County, biit on the other hand building inspection was to be discontinued and also the health and sanitation service at present given in the southern portion of the Manawatu County. On the increased assessment of 7d for the county and lOd for boroughs per head of population, the total contribution of the local authorities for 'the health and sanitation service would be £566, leaving about £400 to be carried by the department. In regard to building inspection, continued Mr: Burdekin, the Horowhenua County Council and Levin and ptaki Borough Councils collected jointly about £820 in fees for permits. That sum would represent quite a substantial portion of the amount required to provide a building inspector for the whole area. That was one alternative and the other was for each local body to appoint somebody in its own area to carry out its building inspection. Mr. Atmore said the department's ruling that building supervision had to be excluded from the health inspector's duties had" come as af surprise to the Otaki delegates, and placed a new aspect on the subject. • The Otaki Borough was satisfied with the present arrangepient whereby the health inspector undertook building supervision for it. Last year Otaki had contributed £65 to the cost of the health inspector and it was prepared to make an increase, but nothing like the amount suggested by the department. Mr. Burdekin pointed out that the department was limiting the areas in which its inspectors would

work to- a maximum population of 15,000. In the Levin and Otaki Boroughs and' Horowhenua County the population was -15, 916. It was due to the growth of the district that building inspection was being stopped. When the population of a district reached 15.000 the department would "v not allow its officer to undertake anything but* health and sanitation work. Mr. Atmore commented that if the department's dictum had to be 'accepted, there was no option but for the local bodies to appoint a -joint building inspector or e'acn employ a sepai;ate person. He pointed out that the health inspector had to inspect drainage installations in new buildings, and it was therefore easy for him to give the constriiction work supervision at the. same time. "I am not prepared to take the dictum without some approach to the department," added Mr. Atmore. Mr. Trueman pointed out that the Foxton and Shannon Boroughs had not had their building inspection done by the health inspector. The department's discontinuation of/ this, service would, therefore, be no loss to them. " Mr. Downes intimated that the Shannon Borough was quite satished with the present arrangement. ' ». • Mr. Burdekin remarked that if Otaki, Levin and the county each secured their own part-time inspector he felt they would get a better service under the difficulties existing today than with a group I'qspector for all three bodies. Mr. Atmore: Otaki's experience of a part-time man before the present arrangement was that it was not satisfactory. • • Mr. Burdekin asked how Otaki and the county would be sltuated assuming Levin decided to have its own part-time inspector. Mr. Colquhoun replied that as •far as the county was concerned fche matter would be discussed at the conference of the Counties' Association in July as between the association and department. Until then the county was not prepared to ally itself with any scheme'. __ Mr. Atmore said he felt Otaki would take it up with the department and endeavour to have the present arrangements continue. A motion wa?s then passed unanimously that those present recommend their local bodies not to adopt a group scheme for building inspection. Further, that in regard to the health and sanitation inspection service they are of the opinion that the ' present scheme, whereby the departmental Inspector combines the duties and responsibilities of the local authorities with those of the department under the Health Act, is the .more satisfactory method and should be retained. It was .moved by Mr. Colquhoun and seconded by Mr. Downes. Mr. Burdekin commented that the motion left the boroughs open to make any further individUal representations to the department or their • own internal arrangements, while it did not tie the county. In concluding the meeting, Mr. Burdekin thanked those present for attending. Mr. Small moved a vote of thanks to the chair. It was seconded by Mr. Colquhoun and carried.