CORRESPONDENCE

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3669, 23 July 1927, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE

(TO the Editor)

Sir. —Permit me space in which to put a questionaire before our City Fathers who, I presume, are capably performing the duties which the ratepayers entrusted them lo perform on their behalf: — Why the waterworks foreman omits from his monthly reports the cost of pumping water to flush the sewers? The cost each month of maintenance of the sewers? The number of branch sewers that have to be opened up and relaid, and also the cause for same? The reason for the sewer being choked up with surface sand? Why the filth hauled from the manholes is allowed to remain on the roadway as at present at the corner of Main and Union Sts. ? The condition of the sewers in general each month? To my mind, and also my knowledge of the above questions, I cannot do other than think that the Council is too prone to take and pass these monthly statements without any attempt to ! satisfy themselves, other than appears in the report each month. In fact, it seems to me that what may suit the writer of those monthly reports is suitable for the Council, but it happens not to be suitable to a number of. ratepayers. If it is going to take two or three men running round cleaning out sewers, what will the position be in a few years’ time? Sir, with all due respect to Councillors, personally, I have arrived at the conclusion that some people merely stand each election in t]ie hope of gratifying their vanity, by obtaining the high office of Councillor, without any regard for the administration part whatever. We elect a Council every two years. Where they get to or what they do —well its past me. Take the swimming baths for instance. Why does not the Mayor lay his cards upon the tabid for public inspection, why not let the public know the reason of the hold-up with the baths? Is it not a public business? Why the secrecy? Will the Mayor reply?— Yours, etc. . CIVIS. Sir, —Please grant me space in which to ventilate a matter that was dealt with at the last meeting of the Council. A certain ratepayer, unemployed, complained that non-rate-payers were given work by the waterworks foreman while unemployed ratepayers were idle. The Council recommended that where extra labour was required, it should be given to. ratepayers. Now, Sir, I think that only fair, as they have to bear the,burden and each year pays unsteadily increasing rate, but contrary to the Council’s decision, nonratepayers are still given preference, although ratepayers with experience of sewerage work beyond the confines of Foxton, and, I say that advisedly, are left to be spectators. Does a -personal difference debar one from getting a living or is it victimisation? Does the dog wag the tail, or the tail wag the dog? The Council is in the same category as any other employer and usually to disobey orders results in a vacancy. There cannot be two bosses and I take it that the Councillors are acting in that capacity on the ratepayers’ behalf, and should see that their wishes are duly carried out, or know the reason why.—Yours etc. J FAIR. PLAY.