PUTARURU REPRESENTATION.

Putaruru Press, Volume VII, Issue 295, 4 July 1929, Page 5

PUTARURU REPRESENTATION.

ON POWER BOARD. Fresh Election Likely. The question of the representation of tne rutaruru town district on tne Thames Valley Electric Bovver Board | was again before the Putaruru Town Board at its meeting on Monday iiigiit, consequent on a letter from the board’s solicitors (Messrs, idampson, Bell and Loch head), who enclosed a letter from the Minister of Puolic Works (the Hon. E. A. Ransom), which was to the effect that it was considered that the Putaruru town district should Jte combined with the Matamata county, and that as the former body is temporarily disfranchised steps will be taken to issue tile necessary Order-in-Council.

The chairman (Mr. G. G. Griffiths) stated that the Minister of Internal Affairs was recently in Matamata, together with the Power Board officials, and the Department issued an edict declaring the election null and void. The manager of the Power Board was inclined to blame the Putaruru Town Board, who decided to let it go this year and come under the Matamata County Council. The election was going to cost the Power Board £IOO, and they wanted him (the chairman) to wire to Wellington and say that the town district was satisfied, but he could not do so. Mr. Anderson (Matamata county chairman) was satisfied that it was not the fault, of the Putaruru Town Board. The latter body had tried to be coupled with the Matamata Town Board but the latter were opposed to it.

Mr. McDermott failed to see how it affected Matamata, a statement with which the chairman agreed, who went on to say that the whole nosition would have to be reorganised. The position was that purchasers who were making a profit out of the power had more say than the consumers. The Town Board had no right to say that their ratepavers should not have a vote. It would be a dangerous precedent. Mr. McDermott was of the opinion that the fault was not theirs, but the Power Board. , That it was the fault of the Department of Internal Affairs was the opim-T. expressed by the chairman, and Mr. McDermott furthe v stated that the Department and Power Board must have known that they were taking a risk in disfranchising such a large number of ratepayers. He suggested letting matters take their own course, a suggestion that was agreed to, The discussion then ceased.

ELECTION OPPOSED. Power Board Discussion. . A telegram from the Department of Internal Affairs asking the Thames Valley Eleetric Power Board to .fix a date for the election of representatives of the combined district of Matamata county and Putaruru town was provocative of a considerable amount of discussion at Tuesday’s meeting of the board. The chairman, Mr. F. Strange, said Putaruru was disfranchised, but not by any action of the board. The position was unprecedented. However, to hold an election would ,be expensive and would probably cost the board £l5O. Mr. Anderson said the Matamata county would be satisfied to have joint representation with the Putaruru town district. Apparently the latter wished to be bracketed with the Matamata town district, which did not want Putaruru, and consequently Putaruru was left out altogether. The population of the two town districts was only one quarter, and the capital value one sixth, of the county. The speaker said he could not understand the attitude of the Matamata Town Board. Mr. J. Price considered that the Power Board should protest against any election owing to the expense, nud he suggested that an Order-in-Councii be pressed for to enable one of the sitting members to represent Putaruru. If nothing came of this the delegates should make a point of stressing the mntter when at the conference in Wellington. Mr. Anderson moved along the lines of Mr. Price’s suggestions, whi-h he supported.

The chairman seconded. Mr. Corbett was doubtful whether a sitting member could be appointed to represent another area. Mr. Pohlen strongly favoured protesting against the holding of an election and pointed out that it was a bad precedent to couple a town, district with a county owing to the different system of franchise. The motion was carried. J

Mr. Anderson then moved that the Government be asked to allow, by Order-in-Council, the Putaruru town district to be represented by the Matamata county member until fresh arrangements could be made. The Chairman : The whole basis of representation will have to be thoroughly gone into before next election. Mr. Price seconded the motion, which was carried.