COUNCIL LOAN MONEY
In the Mayor's reply to my. letter (writes "Ratepayer"), Mr. Hislop says: " 'Ratepayer' is entirely astray in. his knowledge of the legal requirements to enable any of the money to be expended." That refers to the tunnels or waterworks loan sanctioned in 1920, the balance unexpended amounting to £114.000. So the Mayor says now- 'Tarliamentary sanction is necessary to enable the loan authorised in I^2o to be expended for any purpose other than specifically stated in the loan proposal. It is therefore necessary—and has all along been necessary—to obtain legislation to enable the diversion of those moneys to purposes other than that for which they were originally raised." I am not a lawyer, but I know that the City Council has power by Act of Parliament subject to certain conditions, <fto use unexpended loan money not required for its original purpose for any other public purpose. It is the Mayor who is astray in his law. My • contention, therefore, stands that this Bill to take away the rights of the ratepayers to sanction the expenditure of £114,000 on works not authorised by ratepayers was not necessary. .
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19321122.2.146
Bibliographic details
Evening Post, Volume CXIV, Issue 124, 22 November 1932, Page 13
Word Count
189COUNCIL LOAN MONEY Evening Post, Volume CXIV, Issue 124, 22 November 1932, Page 13
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Evening Post. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in