THE EMPOWERING BILL.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXV, Issue 4755, 24 September 1924, Page 2

THE EMPOWERING BILL.

I'LAI.NS WWtIW EVlUklWn REPORT BY CLERK. Reporting to the Hauraki Plains County Council on Tuesday Mr E. Walton the county clerk, stated that, together with the chairman, he had appeared befoi'e the Local Bills Committee of the House of Representatives and given evidence in favour of the Empowering Bill. In view of the unusual conditions existing in thcounty, the council had considered the best solution would be the Bill, He had exhibited a plan of the county,. and pointed out the rating areas of the existing bridges. The maintenance of these bridges was a charge on the whole of the county, and the Kirikiri, Pipiroa, and Maukoro bridges could be made a charge on the whole county. A poll of ratepayers on these proposals would have no legal effect if the bridges were built under section 119 of the Public Works Act. The history of the council’s policy was related by Mr Walton, who pointed out .that it was possible for a part to be carried out, but not the whole. The human element entered, so it was possible, and very probable, that the minority would not. have their bridges erected. The bridge policy had been an election issue, and the ratepayers had endorsed it’ by returning the council. While giving his evidence he did not know of the Patetonga opposition, so had said that there was only a petition from 96 ratepayers against the proposal. The matter had been discussed by the council for four and a hal,f years, and the discussion had been reported in the Press. Of the nine councillors only’ one was opposed to the Bill. It would be a costly matter to hold polls of ratepayers on every bridge proposal, and it was not desirable ■that one poll should be held for a complete bridging scheme as the council would therefore be committed to build many bridges that might later be thought unnecessary. The hearing of evidence for and against the proposal by the Committee was in the nature of a trial by an independent jury. The council had secured the advice of an independent expert, Mr E. F. Adams, civil engin eer, of Thames, and he had recommended the Empowering Bill. The resident engineer of the Public Works Department, acting on instructions from the Minister for Public Works, had sought information on the subject and had stated that he would recommend the Bill. The Main Highways scheme was dependent upon the bridges being erected. The Depart-, ment of Internal Affairs had reported against the proposal, contending that the council, had sufficient powers in existing legislation. From this Mr Walton took two fav-ou’-able inferences. First, the council was not asking for something contrary to general legislation; and, secondly, that the council, while it could have obtained its end by indirect means, had sought openly to get special legislation giving direct power to do what it could do by other means. The Treasury recommended that the provisions of the Local Bodies Loans Act should be adhered to. Mr Waltdt. admitted that, taking the position generally, the stand was coirect. As a general rule the provisions of the Local Bodies Loans Act should be followed out, but it was clearly established that there were many important exceptions to the general rule, as, for instance, section 119 of the Public Works Act.

Further, to prove the fact that there were exceptions, Mr Walton referred to the trend of recent legislation which, by numerous local Acts and a fair number of public Acts, was increasing the powers of local bodies by way of authorising them to raise loans without polls, and that the unusual conditions prevailing in the county justified treating the (subject matter of the Bill as coming within the exceptions.

In concluding Mr Walton based the council’s request on the belief that the Bill was just and equitable, and that the majority of the council and ratepayers believed it .to be so. He hoped the Committee, with the help of its wide and varied experience in these matters, would agree with the council. He assured the Committee that the council was sincere in its efforts to do the best for the county, and i£ it had been convinced that the Bill was not a fair and jirst measure, then application for it would not have been made.

The amendments made in the Bill by the Committee, said Mr Walton, were now well known.

Crs. Parfitt, Mayn, and Hare said that the clerk had stated the case from the council’s point of view verywell indeed.

Cr. Hare said it was fortunate .that there was a representative of the Netherton ratepayers present. He did not think the council would put the poll before the ratepayers. Crs. Parfitt and Harris : Won’t we 1 Members pointed out that the Bill had yet to go before the House, so it was useless discussing at the present time what the next stepk should be.