BOROUGH COUNCIL

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 470, 2 March 1933, Page 6

BOROUGH COUNCIL

WHAKA DRAINAGE SPECIAL MEETING CLARIFIES LOCAL LABOUR POSITION MOTION RESCINDED The yexed question of who should be employed upon the Whakarewarewa sewerage contract was the cause of a special meeting of the Rotorua Borough Council on Tuesday evening, which' lasted from 7.30 p.im to 9.40 p,m, and resulted in the recission^ of a motion passed at) the last meeting that only local men should be employed on the work. The Mayor, who had called the meeting, was. in the chair. Crs. Urquhart, Coleman, Johnston, Keane, Mitchell, Smith, Wackrow and Bayfeild were .present. The Mayor said that the meeting h'ad been called to consider a notice of motion to the effect that the motion that only local men be engaged on the Whaka sewerage works be rescinded and substitute one to the effect that a qualified drainlayer be employed with experience of drainlaying in bad country, and also of sulphur jointing. Cr. Smith moved that the council consider the matter. Cr. Johnston asked if this meant that Standing Orders should be sus.nended.

The Mayor said that they would not; the council would still be under Standing Orders, proyided the passiLng of Cr. Smith's resolution was unanimous. Cr. Johnston wishe'd to know if he • would be able to introduce another matter. The Mayor said that this was a matter for the council to decide, but he had no objection to it being dealt with. Cr. Smith's motion was then carried. The Mayor explained that the reason for .the notice of motion was that the motion which had been carried at th'e last meeting of the council, that only local men be employed at Whakarewarewa, meant that any but local men would be dismissed. On consideration of tihe motion, as he was in charge of the drainage committee, he thought that as only .a bare quorum of the council had b^en present he did not know whether it really expresotd the desire of the council. The matter was so important to the council and the job that he had made inve sti'gations and . found that one loca.1 man could be etnployed on pipejointing and he had instructed the engineer to dismiss one single man and replace him with the local man, retaining the other single man, who was classed as a married man by the Labour Department, as he was supporting dependents. He then got two members of the council to sign the notice of motion, so as to have the matter re-opened.

His reason for the alternative motion was .... Cr. Urquhart: Do you rule that you can speak to two motions at once? The Mayor: Yes. I wish to save the time of the council, but if it is the council's wish I will only speak to one. Cr. Urquhart: We want to have it all in order. Cr. Johnston thought that one motion only should be dealt with. Continuing, the Mayor said that he thought that the full council should accept the responsibiliy of such a vital step. Hhe then moved the resolution of recission. 1 Cr. Wackrow seconded. Cr. Johnston thought that the Mayor's procedure in interviewing couneillors since the original motion had been carried was not the right thing. It was not the correct thing for councillors who had not been present to attempt to judge on a matter which they had not heard. He also objected to the committee not carrying out the instructions of the council and discharging the men at once. The notice of motion not being put in until Saturday had caused him to desire a special meeting of the council and the Mayor had had the chance to call a special meeting. He 'had seen all the local plumbers and drainlayers and they had told him that it was not any more expert work than bitumen . jointing. The man who had invented the process had told him this. He would suggest the meeting be adjourned to allow of experts giving the council an exhibition oi sulphur jointing. At thisi juncture Cr. Coleman rose_ to a point of order that Cr. Johnston had already spoken for his allotted time, but the Mayor ruled that he had three more minutes. Continuing, Cr. Johnston stated that the work did not need experts. Cr. Urquhart contended that the council had been informed that the twa men employed were experts. He considered that local men should be employed if possible. The drainage engineer .had not made sufficient enquiries and there was now found to be competent sulphur jointers in the town. Since he was not satisfied that there were not expert local men he would op'pose the recission of the resolution.

Cr. Keane said that he had to go . fuv.l asked that the motion be put. The mayor concurred. Cr. Urquhart: If you apply the closure I'll leave the room. Cr. Johnston: So will I. You've] got enough to carry it. j Crs. Johnston and Ui'qubart complained that neither Cr. Keane norf Smith had taken the trouble to attend the last meeting when they could hayq done so. The Mayor quoted Standing Ordersi Cr. Smith", who had moved that the question be not yet put, which had been seconded by Cr. Coleman, then withdrew it. - Cr. Keane then ieft. Cr. Johnston moved that the Mayor's notice of motion he not' E.greed to and that the engineer, or whoever gave him instructions, he r.sked to give his reasons as to why the cQuncil's orders had not been carried out. The Mayor refused to accept the' amehdment as the first part was a] direct negative and the second only concerned himself and h'e would give his reasons. Cr. Johnston: I question your rul-v ing. . | The Mayor: I am sorry, but I rule' ... .. jj - — V k 1 '

done. The Mayor: Yes: The Mayor then explained that as the duties of chairman of the drainage committee had been delegated to him by Cr. Coleman and having made inquiries he acted as he had done. As a matter of fact, Cr. Johnston was in error in stating that the notice of motion had not been handed in in time. Cr. Johnston: But it wasn't in order. Cr. Coleman: I think that Cr. Johnston should allow his Worship to proceed. The Mayor: I thought the notice of motion was in order and I take all responsibility for the action taken. Cr. Johnston moved that th'e motion be not agreed to owing to the fact that the drainage committee had employed other than relief men, according to the original arrangement. He then detailed his reasons. The Mayor considered this was still a negative and could not be accepted. Cr. Johnston then moved that a vote of censure be passed on the committee for failing to act as the council had ordered.

This th'e mayor accepted but it lapsed for want of a secondsr. Cr. Johnston. I didn'tl want to put it like that but you forced me to. The mayor pointed out that Cr. Johnston was incorrect in his assumption that only relief workers were to have been employed and provision for the employment of skilled labour had been made in the estimates — a fact which was always taken into consideration by the drainage committee.

Cr. Bayfeild said that he' would vote against the recission since he had made inquiries land found that there were any amount of men who could do the work in the town. Cr. Coleman's attitude at last meeting had been wrong and the attempt to rescind the motion was all wrong. Cr, Wackrow reminded the couneillors that they were trustees, of public money. He had been surprised at two single men being employed and on making inquiries had found them experts who did not require watching. The council depended upon the engineer to give them a good job and ha.d no right to interfere. In his own experience he knew that it was very bad policy to interfere. As a matter of fact the two men would be hard to beat in New Zealand and he did not feel like. interfering with good men. There was no more tricky job in New Zealand.

Cr. Smith agreed with Cr. Wackrow that it was not right to ti® the engineer's hands. The whole thing was. a storm in a tea cup. Cr. Johnston th'en moved as an amendment that the meeting be adjourned to allow evidence to be adduced that there were fit and expert men in Rotorua to do the work. This also lapsed for want of 'a seconder. The motion was then put, Crs. Wackrow, Smith, Coleman and the mayor voting for it and Crs. Urquhart, Johnston and Bayfeil'd against. Cr. Mitchell did not vote.

The mayor informed him that he must vote. The mayor explained that if the motion were carried the field was then cleared for a full discussion. The resolution was then put again and carried, Cr. Mitchell voting for it. The mayor then moved that the eni gineer be authorised to employ one 1'ully qualified pipe-layer with experience in the laying of large pipes in jad country and with previous experience of sulphur jointing. The most suitable man offering to be engaged .rrespective of local claims. All other labour engaged on work to be local men; preference to be given to married men.

In speaking to his motion the mayor said that he believed in the principle of local men but considered that one expert was necessary. When the council had a contractor laying the suburban drainage it did not tell h.m whom he" should employ. Unless the council was prepared to completely exonerate the drainage -engineer from all liability it must allow him to have at least one man he could trust thoroughly. The conditions under which the engineer would have to work would not be of the best. In some jobs. local men wuld be quite competent and would be employed. Cr. Bayfeild: At 16s a day? The mayor said that he did not know whether 2s or ls lOd an hour was to be paid. He had made enquiries into the capabilities of the relief workers available but had not approached the local plumbers and drain layers. Without any hesitation he would say that it was absolutely essential that the council have the best possible man for the job for they could not affor'd any mistakes esp-ecially in the thermal country.

The employment of a man who was not thoroughly efficient would probably cost the council pound-s. a day on the job and hundreds of pounds later. Ii) would nt be fair to the engineer, to the council or the ratepaycrs if they jeopardised the Whakarewarewa drainage scheme for the idea of employing one man. He appealed also to those opposing the motion to realise their responsibility to the ratepayers. The council had a duty to the ratep-ayers and to the engineer who got men he knew beeause he had proved them to be reliable— not as had been suggested beeause they were friends of his. Cr. Smith seconded the resolution. Cr. Mitchell said that the history of sewerage in Rotorua had been unfortunate. He did not want this to oe another chapter. He. thought that the council should give the engineer a free hand to engage both men. The scheme a1} Whaka was a big experiment and the engineer should have ivery .assi-stance. Cr. Johnston rose to a point of order. The council was not discussing two men. The mayor said that Cr. Mitchell was in order. Cr. Mitchell said that the engineer had proved to be a good one and ' should have his full chance to detliver the goods. The engineer -should ' have" the right to select his two men and put the scheme through. Cr. Johnston maintained that there were plenty of competent men in Rotorua. He thought that the council should hear evidence to this effect. There was also the question of insuri ance. He also queried the engineer's ' ability to do the job himself. y Cr. Wackrow denied this and -said -t. V:A ."-nirs.

and well within the estimates. Cr. Smith said that Cr. Johnston had completely missed the point. The council had no right to dictate to the engineer as to how a job should be done for which he was responsible. Cr. Coleman said that it was the engineer's opinion that if the council did not let him employ the man he wanted it might cost the council a considerable amount of money as the work might have to be done over again. If the council insisted on employing local men he would do his best. Cr. Johnston: The trouble is we've got an over supply of engineers. Cr. Coleman": That's ycur opinion. Cr. Johnston: That's what we're all here for — to express our opinion.. Cr. Urquhart said that no evidence had been adduced that there were any competent pipelayers in the district and he felt that he must supp'ort the engineer who had done wondexrful work and must have every support. This had le'd hixn to modify his opinion and he would support the mayor's resolution. After some further discussion the resolution was put and carried. Who Bought the Car? Cr. Johnston brought up the matter of the purchase of the drainage engixxeer's cax\ He had been informed that Cr. Colemaxx had purchased the car and the council had to purchase it from Cr. Coleixian, which was out of order. Cr. Smith suggested that the matter bq taken in committee. Cr. Colexnan objected -since it was a serious insinuation. Cr. Johnston asked what the audit department would say. Cr. Coleman said that h'e had purchased the car on behalf of the council and -the receipt w.as ixij the council's name. He had given his own oheque since he had no council cheque with hixxx. The- car ha'd been registered in the eouxicil's name. Cr. Johnston said that if this were correct he was prepared to with'draw. Cr. Coleman: Why didn't you ask me first before making this staternent in public? The mayor confirmed Cx\ Colejyjrl £hf> -matter was ,.i. ymk- m - n*