THE MAYORALTY

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 54, 27 November 1926, Page 10

THE MAYORALTY

CIVIC LEAGUE STATEMENT REPLY TO COUNCILLOR A. D. BENNETT The following statement was made yesterday by the executive of the Civic League in answer to the criticism oi Councillor H. D. Bonnett ano others in regard to the league’s part in election matters:— “At present the league has not entered on the election campaign; that will come later. This ig only a little washing-up to get rid of some of the lies and distortions put before the public. To understand the league it is necessary to know its constitution and principles. Each association elects two representatives to the league’s council. This council is the league’s parliament and the executive, chosen by it, carries out its decisions. The principles of the league are to place the interests of the citv before any personal, party, or other consideration, and to make recommendations. but to bind no one in the exercise of their rigjits as citizens. "In choosing candidates for public office, the league does not act as a party, which confines its choice to its own adherents. It does not choose any candidate because he or she is a member of the league, nr*' does it discriminate against them on that account. For the most part its selections have been from outside the league. On three occasions men who entered for selection and were declined decided to stand. The league never opposed them in any .way, or even referred to them. It was frankly recognised that thev were exercising their free rights as citizens, and the league respected that fact. Two of these are loyal supporters of the league now, and the third is awav from Wellington. This only proves that the league is not a party, and does not dictate to anyone.

The Mayoral Candidate. "Tn choosing a candidate for the Mayoralty, the league has only done what every elector is entitled to do. It is ridiculous to argue that our choice, bare anyone. If others come forward the league will consider the position when it arises. At present it has made its definite choice, and is going 1 right on. Its system of selection this time has been just the same as on all previous occasions. It is the same as when Mr. H. D. Bennett and others were chosen. The selection committee decided, and the only difference is that on this occasion the associations were allowed two representatives each on the committee instead of one as previously. This procedure has been accepted, and tacitly approved of by all associations since the league was first formed. No association has ever objected to it. It is only the enemies of the league outside who are objecting and pulling strings to create trouble.

“The public is being told the associations were not consulted. On September 10, all associations were written to, inviting them to offer any suggestions they liked towards securing good candidates. Associations meet at varying periods, some only once a quarter. All replies to that letter are not yet in. This shows what could happen if the roundabout course were followed. The choice would be settled some time in March. The associations know it is absurd. They trust their delegates, and when not satisfied they change them. The complaint of a disappointed man like Councillor 11. D. Bennett should be estimated at its real value. Had he or Mr. Norwood been chosen we should never have heard about the wickedness of the league and its bad procedure. “The league follows certain rules in choosing candidates. It docs not allow anyone who is a candidate for selection to be at any time on the selection committee, and it absolutely bars even the possibility of canvassing by holding names in reserve until that time when they are considered by the body making the choice.

“If the individual who attacked the league in the guise of being a delegate is the man we pick him to be, then he is a curious delegate. He was appointed bv his association nearly seven months ’ago, and up till now he has not attended a single meeting, yet he presumes to tell all the rest, who did attend, their business. For all practical purposes, he is not a delegate, and has no direct knowledge of the business he is seeking to criticise. His statement that the Kilbirnie and Kbandallah Associations have objected to the procedure followed is simply not true. “State of Muddlement.” “When the Civic League objected to the wav the Kent Terrace alterations were rushed, without securing a proclamation, it was roundly abused for daring to criticise. It at no time opposed any necessary improvements, and said so. Now, Councillor H. D. Ben nett comes in and practically says the the league was right and the Mayor was wrong. It has taken him some time to find out the truth, or at least to acknowledge it. He lets the Mayoi down in saying ’this work was a hobby of the Mayor’s' and that ‘he broke loose’ ou it. Citizens may ask why should the Mayor make a particular work a hobbv more than others? the trouble is that Councillor H. D. Bennett is still wrong. He says ‘the circumstances were such that we did not realise we needed a proclamation.’ Has he forgotten that the council at the time passed this resolution, with him present?: ‘That the general scheme be approved, and that all steps be taken to obtain the necessary proclamation under the Land Act, 1924.' T f this councillor’s statement is to be credited. what a state of muddlement is disclosed. They did not realise a proclamation was needed, and at the same time thev pass a motion to apply for it on the ground that it was necessary. Re has not merely let the Mayor down, but the whole council. Attitude to Labour. “The league is not opposed to Labour. It would be strange it it were, in view of the fact that there are hundreds of working men and women in its ranks. On the league’s council there are wageearners and employers working together for the good of the city. We are not prepared to join Mr. H. D. Bennett or anybody else in an anti-Labour crusade. Why should we? Tu connection with Health Week and other civic movement--, we have seen employers and employed, workers and capitalists, pulling together for the common good. This is as it should be, and it is the ground the league stands on—the broad basis of citizenship. “The league is opposed to the intrusion of party in civic affairs, whether the party is homed Reform. Nationalist, Labour, or any other name. If men come forward as citizens independent of party, whether they are workmen or employers, they will receive the same just consideration from the league. As a matter of fact, the league would like to see some workers come forward as citizen candidates, placing the city before party, class, or anything else. The league is not against Labour. It is foi Labour, but against party in civic affairs because it stands for civic unionism which some people are trying to kill. “At this early stage the whisperers are at work. . .'. That sort of attack is mean and contemptible, and citizens should be on guard against it The league has bluntly criticised Mr. Norwood whore it has thought him wrong in matters of policy or adminisirviion. At the same time it has refused absolutely to be drawn into any di-cussion of motives. We endeavour as much as possible tn keep off the persona] ground, and certainly never indulge in personali“The idea is being put about that tbs Civic League has been weakened in the confidence nf the public., but in reply to such suggestion-- we have only Io slate that we have this year more names in hand for consideration as possible candidates than we have had on any previous occasion. At present there are eighteen names, and others arc under contemplation, but it is not intended to deni with this matter hurriedly, for the league desires to give careful

scrutiny before making its choice. Of I’hosc sitting councillors .who were on the league’s ticket at the last we have received replies from all nut three. ’’