Local Bodies in Conflict.

Patea Mail, 17 October 1881, Page 3

Local Bodies in Conflict.

Three Road Board districts have declared, in public meetings, against central management by the Patea County Council. This result might have been foreseen, it being well-known that country settlers have been largely in favor of local management as against a central system. It is better to con-

tinue and improve a simple local machinery which settlers understand and believe in, than it is to force on settlers a larger central machinery

which they understand less, and which they regard as a cumbrous system of extravagance. It should not need much worldly wisdom to see that. The meetings were told that the cost of working Road Boards is much greater than the cost of working the County Council. Returns were placed before the County Council some months ago, professing to show the relative cost. Of all the returns ever placed before a jStapublic body within our experience, these were the very worst for this purpose., The presented no common basis of comparison, except this: It takes so much to spend £I,OO, through a Road Board, and so " much through the County Council. The latter does it at a less per-centage, therefore the County system is cheaper. Now, that form of putting the case should not deceive even a novice. It follows that the body which spends £3,000 a year on roads can do it at a less per-centage for management than the body which spends only £IOO a year. Settlers believe that Road Boards could spend the £3,000 on main roads without any cost for management. That is more like the real question. 1 The first requirement in road-work is local control. The second is economical management. We propose to show that these are not secured through the County system of central management. Among the expenses of the County system are these:— . Engineer’s salary £2OO Sundries in his department 35 _ Printing and stationery 50 Chairman’s salary about ~ 30 Clerk, Treasurer, &c 200 Travelling allowance to Councillors ." 107 Telegrams, stamps, &c. 18 Sundries in balance-sheet 70 Total expenses £7OO So far as we can see, and allowing a margin for office expenses, every one of these items could be saved by abolishing the Council as a road-mending body ; retaining it only for levying and apportioning the annual rate, managing the County Hospital (which has separate accounts), and disenssing twice a year any general matters that may arise. If the £7OO so saved were put on the roads, in addition to £3,000 expended annually at present, what would be the increased cost of spending £3,700 through the Road Boards ? First, the two rates would be collected together, through the present Clerks of Road Boards; and it is as easy to rfr* ceive 2s as Is from the same hand.

Secondly, no County Engineer, would be required, because each member of a Hoad Board would know every yard ot the County road within his district, and would need no professional report from end to end of the County, as the Council does at present. There would be general reports once a year as to the condition and requirement of the main road, these reports being made by Road Boards; and the total rate would be levied to cover the total requirement, each Board having the spending of the sum required within its portion of the main road. The cost of maintenance would thus be equalised by a County rate. Thirdly, the County Clerk’s duties would be reduced certainly within one day’s labor a week; and if the Clerk had a town office for his private business, he could there do the Hospital and other clerking duties along with bis own, the cost being covered by what is now charged against the Hospital for Clerk’s work. Fourthly, a skilled Engineer is less required to mend a road already made than he is to lay off new roads. It

Road Boards do the engineering and

overseeing at present, they are more than competent to keep in repair a bit of main road already made. Fifthly, the Councillors would not need paying for meeting twice a year. The Chairman might fairly receive a salary, say £25 a year, for attending to matters which crop up from day to day ; such as applications for relief, and admittances to Hospital. Most of that salary could be charged against the Hospital ; and we believe the saving would still be £7OO a year. RESULTS OF THE CHANGE.

By reducing expenses for management, the subsidy would not be reduced pro ratal for it must be evident that the Government pays its subsidy on the actual receipts of the County. If £7OO out of these receipts are expended in useless establishment charges, instead of being spent on the roads, that £7OO is a dead loss, and does not affect the subsidy. So long as you raise the same amount of rate, you get the same subsidy, which is now 10s for every pound of income. Each Road Board would get control of the main road through the district; and this fact would increase the importance of that body, and thereby attract competent men. There would also be this wholesome change, that when a member at present gets a particular road made or mended, his turn is served, and he drops oft’ the Board ; whereas, under the new plan, each intelligent settler would feel a permanent interest in his Road Board, because its permanent duty would then be to keep all main lines of traffic in good repair, as well as the bye-roads. Reform in that direction appears to ns good policy.

Then what additional salaries or expenses would any Road Board incur by having the mending of the main road ? The County Council spent last year in wages for road-men, £1,234; and spent in repairs to roaids and bridges, £1,781, this including, metal, carting, and some labor and material for bridges. These items amount to £3,015, and adding the £7OO which can be saved in salaries and sundries, there would be a total of over £3,700 available for division among Road Boards. But the County area being reduced, the same tolar of rates and subsidy would not be received. Take it in tills way : say one-tliir<3 of the County road is cut off; therefore deduct one-third from the £3,000, and we get £2,000. The cost of the County’s central staff would remain the same, even with the reduced area; so that adding £7OO for the staff, we get £2,700 as the total division among three Road Boards, to maintain the County road and bridges in good repair. Suppose £IOOO were handed to the Patea West, £7OO to the Patea East, and £IOOO to the Wairoa Board, do those Boards think they could spend the money on the main road more beneficially, and with less cost in salaries, than the County Council ? There are two proposals for the coming elections :—(1) If Road Boards be merged in the County, £7OO a year will continue to go in the cost of a central staff. ( 2]|J If the Council be deprived of its road-mending duties, and reduced to a harmless body for levying and apportioning a main-road rate, that £7OO will be saved as an extra endowment for main-road repairs. Which is it to be ?