PUTARURU REPRESENTATION.

Putaruru Press, Volume VII, Issue 313, 7 November 1929, Page 5

PUTARURU REPRESENTATION.

QN POWER BOARD. k With Matamata Board. For some months the question of ■the representation of Putaruru on -the Thames Valley Power Board has been the subject of considerable in--terest in. local body circles in this district, a peculiar position having arisen which resulted in Putaruru being disfranchised. The Power Board referred the case to Mr. T. E. Martin, counsel to the Electrical Power Boards’ Association, for a legal opinion, and this opinion was before the board at Tuesday’s meeting. When the board was constituted an electric power district in 1920, Putaruru was not then a town district, but part and parcel of the Matamata County Council. In the petition for constitution it was stated that the electors of the constituent districts would elect the members of the board. The electors of the Matamata County Council are the ratepayers of the county. Mr. Martin’s views were contained in the answers to a number of questions, as follows: “On the town district becoming ■entitled to representation on the board, its representatives will, in my opinion, be elected by the electors of the town district and not by the ratepayers only. When a county is a constituent district, the representatives thereof are elected by the electors of the county in terms of the Act, although the voting qualification in counties is possessed by ratepayers only. In the ease of a town district, as .the practice is not confined to ratepayers, the term electors includes other persons than ratepayers. “ The only case where the voting qualification under the Act is expressed ti> be that of ratepayers is ■where the petition to form the power district sets out that the members of the board are to be elected by the ratepayers of the district, instead of the electors of the several constituent districts electing their representatives on the board. In all other cases it is the electors of the constituent district who possesses the voting qualifications, and whether they are limited to ratepayers or not ( depends upon whether the district j consists of a county on the one hand, or a borough or town district on the other hand. “If the township, being a constituent district, is added to an existing constituent district, so as to form a ■ combined district, I am of opinion ,r that an election of representatives

of such new combined district will » become necessary when an order-in-council altering the representation of the power district is issued under the 1925 Act. Section 12 provides that the creation, abolition, merger, union hr other alteration of a constituent district does not in itself have any operation so as to affect the then existing membership of the board. Another section states that the Governor-General may from time to time revoke or amend any provisions previously made as to representation of constituent districts or the creation of representation of any combined district, and, by Order-in-Council make with respect .thereto such provisions as he thinks fit. Sub-section three provides that if such Order-in-Coun-cil gives representation to any constituent district or combined district which is not already represented on the board, the Governor-General shall fix the date of the .first election of representatives of that district. “ In the case under review what has happened is that the county is now reduced in area, and a fresh constituent district has been created, which district has at present no representation. If this district is combined with an already existing constituent district there will, in effect, be created a new combined district, not already represented as such, on the board. This will necessitate an Order-in-Council fixing among other things the number of representatives of this new district, and also the date of the first election. If the town district is added to the county of Matamata to form a combined district, the county will lose its representation as a separate constituent district, and representatives will retire from the board on the date to be specified by ■the Order-in-Couniil.” The reading of the opinion was followed by discussion of the question of representation generally. The chairman, Mr. F. Strange, moved that the basis of representation on the board should stand as at present, with the exception that the Matamata and Putaruru Town Boards be coupled together. Mr. Corbett, in seconding, said ‘that he was opposed to counties and town bpards being coupled together for representation. As such bodies

had different methods of election, they should have separate representation. Mr. Price said he was disappointed that there should be so little discussion on this point, which he regarded as a vital one. There were many things happening in the area which made it obvious that there should be

some other means of electing members to the board. He suggested that serious consideration should be given to the ward system. Mr. Corbett had said there would be opposition to a town board being coupled with a county. First there was to consider the population of the county and the town, and with few exceptions the population pro rata in town and country was three persons to every ratepayer. The time was coming when the power board would not be wholly representative of the ratepayers. Every person in the area contributed toward the power board everyone used electricity and paid for it either directly or indirectly. There were going to be other town districts formed in the area in the future, and unless the board looked ahead it would find itself in further trouble. It would be no hardship to establish the ward system. No comparison could be made between town and county elections. He had an objection to Te Aroha, which bought power in bulk, having one representative who represented actually only one consumer.

Mr. Arthur (Te Aroha): I represent the ratepayers.

Mr. Price agreed that Te Aroha should have a measure of representation. He considered, however, that it would not be a success to link two separate town boards together under one man. What man could give service to two towns twenty miles apart? he asked. If this motion was adopted one or other of the towns was going to be inadequately represented. He moved an amendment that the board adopt the ward system of representation. Mr. Flatt seconded, and said he was on all fours with Mr. Price in this scheme. It would be unwise to link Putaruru and Matamata Town Boards, as they were too far apart. As the valuations in the area increased such townships as Turua and Waitoa would become town districts, and the same question would have to be fought out again. 11 the present proposal was followed to its logical conclusion it was conceivable that Morrinsville and Te Aroha would be linked together. The chairman’s proposal was only a temporary expedient. It would be far better to cut the district up into wards. If this were done and portions of the counties were joined with adjacent boroughs there would eventually be a good system of representation. He admitted that the chairman’s motion seemed an easy way out of the present position, but the board had to look to the difficulties that would be created in the future.

Mr. Arthur supported the chairman’s motion. He said that the time for the adoption of the ward system was premature owing to the difference between the franchise of town boards, counties and boroughs. Mr. Corbett said Mr. Flatt had complained, that two towns 20 miles apart- would have inadequate representation. He had, however, overlooked the fact that the same would apply in the ward system.

Mr. Flatt: The wards would incorporate boroughs and counties which adjoined.

Mr. Strange said that if the board wished a change there should be a definite reason. The system had worked admirably in the past. Any question before the board had been considered on its merits irrespective of which member and what consumer brought it forward. Even if the ward system was adopted it would have to be altered from time to time. It would not be hard and fast. Little would be gained by a change, and in his opinion Matamata and Putaruru would not lost anything by the adoption of the system he suggested. Mr. Anderson supported the chairman on account of the difference in franchise between boards and county councils.

The chairman: If we have the ward system it will be more expensive owing to the printing of rolls. At present the county and borough rolls are used.

Mr. Price said that every riding had a roll, and the ridings could be included in the wards in such a manner that expense in printing rolls would be obviated. The amendment was then put and was lost, only the mover and seconder (Messrs. Price and Flatt) voting in favour. The motion was carried, the same members dissenting.