SURPLUS ASSURED

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 73, 27 March 1934, Page 10

SURPLUS ASSURED

AMOUNT NOT KNOWN YET

QUESTION OF DISPOSAL

WAGE CUT RESTORATION

The Mayor (Mr. T. C. A. Hislop) announced at the meeting of the City Council yesterday afternoon that a substantial surplus was assured for the present financial year, ending on March 31, but the exact figure was not available, as accounts still have to be met. The estimates committee, after. considering requirements for next year, recommended budgeting for a credit, and the main discussion was on the question as to how such a credit,- of unknown dimensions, should be utilised. It was made clear that a considerable section of the council favours a restoration of the cuts, at least in part. Tha main recommendations of the estimates committee (consisting of chairmen of the principal committees) were as follows:— 1. That it be an instruction to all committees to reduce their estimates of special expenditure for the coming year so that the total committee allo- , cation will be approximately the same amount as was voted for the year 1933-34, and that the estimates committee be granted: authority to settle the vote for each committee. 2. That the amount of rates to. be levied in the coming year be calculated to produce 5 cent, less than the total amount levied in 1933-34. The Mayor (Mr. T. C. A. Hislop) said; that he did not agree with the second clause and would move that it be deleted. "It is clear to us that at the end of. the financial year, we shall have a substantial surplus," said Mr. Hislop, "but it;is not yet possible to give the exact figure." -. Originally the.figures that came before the estimates committee for the coming year showed that the committees had budgeted for a considerable increase in their annual expenditure, continues Mr. Hislop. The works committee hadbudgeted for another £7000 approximately," the reserves committee for another £1000, and cemeteries for something, more;, there was a, general increase. 'On those figures," and after making provision of £15,000 for unemployment relief, which would be £1000 'less than last year, there would be in hand at the end of the year £4800." The position was discussed by the estimates committee, and it was considered that various committee requirements should be sent back to the committees to see whether they could not, after making proper provision for maintenance and essential new works, bring their exr penditure down to .the approximate amounts on which they were able to get through last year, and. if they were able to do so7the surplus would be so much the greater. THREE ALTERNATIVES. In any ; case, whether the surplus be the amount originally thought, approximately £5000, or a greater amount, the question, would be what would be the best thingto dbwith.that estimated surplus, continued the Mayor. There were three alternatives. There were those who;advocated a rates reduction others advocated a restoration of cuts, and others, including himself, supported a third course, that any moneys that could be made available should be used for doing necessary work by putting on more men at full trades union rates of pay.

If a sum of £10,000 to £12,000 could be made available, at least 100 men could be employed at full rates of pay for seven months, said Mr. Hislop. Just what works should be done would have to_ be decided, but what he had in mind particularly was kerbing and channelling, in which a very big liability had been ■ built up as a 'result of road widening. The council could aPPIy .for . the ordinary relief allocation for the men so taken on and would make up their pay to full rates. However,, everything would depend on how much money would be available, and for that reason the estimates * committee; thought it advisable to ask the various committees to go through their requirements again. ■ ■ .

Councillor M. P. luckier What do you call full-wages.—full wages less the 10. per cent cut? ■ . ♦

Mr. Hislop: Yes, the rate paid to tradesmen.

Councillor Luekie suggested that before . any . discussion, took place the Council, should. be advised of the result of the past year's working. If possible;.;the 'officers of the council should prepare'a balance-sheet showing what the position was. Councillor 'P. M. '. Butler: The - committee is doing its best to prevent the putting into operation of the resolution carried on December 4 last.

The Mayor: That is not so.

Councillor; Butler said that when "he brought dojvn the resolution referred to the estimates committee reported that nothing could be done then, but that the' resolution would be given effect to when, conditions, permitted. The .Mayor: We are not discussing the restoration of the 10 per.cent. cut. Councillor Butler: You mentioned it ■when you were speaking. The Mayor, said Councillor Butler, had. stated previously that there would be £2000 to :come and go on next year. Councillor Chapman and others had'then pointed out that it would be •considerably more. Councillor Forsyth had said that the - committee had budgeted for every- penny, but the position was that instead of £2000 there was a surplus in the vicinity of £25,000. J , REASON FOE SURPLUS. The Mayor said that the fact that there •was_ a bigger surplus than had been anticipated was due to more rates having been paid than was anticipated. He.asked Councillor Butler if he had not been, given figures recently showing that the surplus would be nothing like £10,000. , "We have spent over £10,000 in the past four weeks," replied Councillor Butler. The City Treasurer had reported that the works committee had "brought down . a credit balance of £•2299. r Councillor-Duncan: Where are we getting to? The Mayor: Councillor Butler, this is out of order, you know. Councillor Butler: You suggest that you would like some new men put on, and Councillor Duncan says: "Hear, Jiear." He doesn't know what he is referring;. to., . The Mayor: I was only giving an indication of my general idea. Councillor Butler: Can't .1 give an indication of my general idea? The Mayor: We cannot discuss the matter now. If there was to be no discussion, said Councillor Butler, what was the use of the report? Remarking that there was no need to become excited, Councillor C. H. Chapman, M.P., said that one result of last year's operations was' that those who had-anticipated a very considerable 'surplus had been vindicated.

Personally, he was yery pleased that his anticipation of a surplus had beeriT realised. Prom the figures that had been submitted by the estimates committee there would bo an estimated surplus of about £28,000. He would suggest that this was a conservative estimate, and he would not be surprised if the surplus proved to be more than £30,000. This was ample vindication for those who had suggested that the 10 per cent cut should be restored. The Mayor: The question before us is whether the committees should bo asked to comb their estimates further. REVISION DOWNWARD. Councillor Chapman: My suggestion is that it is unnecessary for the estimates to be curtailed. Had the 10 per cent, cut been restored six months ago it would have cost about £7000 and we would still have had a surplus of £23.000. The idea of sending the estimates back for revision is to ask that the committees should employ less labour than they have budgeted for. All the estimates are bound up with employment, the works and reserves committees particularly, and if those estimates are sent back to the committees with the request that they be revised downward it can only be that they will consider the employment of fewer men, so that 100 men can be employed on special work. You sack them and then employ them again, and take advantage of the unemployment subsidy to bring their wages up to the full rate. It is questionable to mo whether that is the right method. The committees are asked to jettison their special work so that they can get a subsidy from the ■Unemployment Fund.

Councillor Chapman said he was pleased that there was a possibility of a reduction in the rates. He agreed that the council should always consider rate reduction, but the present position was that it was pos»ible to restore at any rate part of the 10 per cent cut and also give a reduction in rates. The committees, he considered, should be instructed to provide for a restoration of at least part of the cut.

Mr. Hislop said that there was no question of fewer men being employed^ if the committees came down to the same figure as in the previous year there would be the same number of men employed. Certain works, such as sealing, provided : very little employment, and what lie considered should be done was to get under way economic works which would employ as many men as possible. There was a considerable balance of a loan available for sealing. The whole thing, would come before the council again, but no one could say what amount would be available until the committees had been through, their figures again. Councillor Luckie said that the. whole business, seemed to him to be rather futile, but the Mayor's proposal was supported by Councillor H. A. Huggins, who said^hat unless it were carried out there could be no return of cuts, reduction of rates nor employment of more men. It iwas a necessary preliminary to further action. If it were not done there would be an estimated surplus of perhaps £4000, but it might bt- that the figure could bo increased to £25,000. VOTING IN THE v DARK. ''It seems to me that until we know tho financial position wo don't know whore we stand," said Councillor W. Appletori. "I shall not vote for clause 1 because I think it is camouflage. It simply means that we are going to delegate the full power to .a committee of six councillors.. I take the strongest exception to that. It is obvious that we cannot vote on the second clause until we know where we are. We ought to know the whole position."

If the.first clause was carried, said Councillor R. McKeen, M.P., the effect would be- to stultify any other proposal councillors might wish to bring forward. Committees should include in their calculations the return of the ■whole or a part of the cut, but if the clauses suggested were passed that could not be done.

Mr. \Hislop said that he . would not mind ' the words from 1933-34 in the first clause being struck out. . (This was later agreed to.)

Councillor McKeen said that he would like to move that committees should be instructed to make provision for the return of a part or the whole of the cuts.

Councillor. P.1 Eraser, M.P.: I think that a decision of the council is not to be regarded as byplay and fun. I was pleased to hear the suggestion that more men should.be employed, but^ I think' that the council will not vary its decision ' that the. lower-paid officers at least should get some return of their cuts, say up to £ 250 at least. The restoration of cuts is a practical possibility from a financial point of view. The council was serious when the matter was last raised and it will be equally, serious- about it again. The first clause, amended by the deletion of the words appearing after the figures' 1933-34, was passed, and the second clause■ was, at Mr. Hislop's suggestion; dropped.

Councillor Appleton was appointed a member of the. estimates committee during the absence of Councillor ,T. Forsyth. ' ■ ■' .