POWER BOARD SALARIES.

Shannon News, 2 May 1922, Page 3

POWER BOARD SALARIES.

CHAIRMAN’S AND MEMBERS’ ALLOWANCES FIXED. The Act under which the Electric Power Boards work provides for the payment of the chairman and members, it being recognised that the work they are called on to do requires close attention and a great deal of time. They are, in fact, directors of a commercial undertaking rather than members of a local body. Regulations have just, been gazetted setting out the limits of the remuneration, and. the Horowhenua Board had before it on Wednesday particulars of the payments made by other Boards. the Central Waikato Board paid its chairman £2OO per annum, and members £1 1/ per meeting or per day when on the Board’s business, with a travelling allowance of 1/ per mile one way. Ihe Cambridge Board also paid £2OO to the chairman and 10/ per meeting to members- It was also stated that the Dannevirke Board paid the chairman £225 and travelling expenses outside the district, while the Thames Board paid £4OO to its chairman. The Horowhenua Board decided, on Mr A. A. Brown’s motion, to pay its members £1 1/ per day for attending meetings, and a similar fee when on the Board’s business by resolution, with travelling expenses of 8d per mile each way.

Mr Gunn mg questioned whether 8d per mile was not “a bit stiff.” He came by train, and it would not cost him that much. Some members came over 30 miles, and it would mount up. The chairman" said the Hospital Boards Act allowed 8d per mile to be paid, and it was generally accepted that it cost that much to run a car. If a member Ravelled by rail be would only put in his actual fare as expenses. Mr Gunning was satisfied with that explanation. , On the question of the chairman’s allowance, Mr Monk said, so far as he was personally concerned, he was prepared to pul every ounce of push lie could into the affairs of the Board No doubt when it came to the phnt of putting the loan proposal before the ratepayers he would need to take the road and explain it to them. Since taking up the position he had had tc m-.ke certain arrangements for the carrying on of his private affairs. As he stated when he took up the chairmanship, he could not afford to g-ve his time to the' neglect of his own affairs without remuneration, and he did not pretend to be able. At lhe same time they did not want to pav away any sum of money unless ‘hey were satisfied they were getting go<>d value for it. They should seek to conserve their money and not wasteleast of all on themselves. Mr Brown moved, and Mr Whibley seconded, that the chairman be given remuneration of £250 per annum, plus travelling expenses. Mr Brown said the chairman would have to devote a lot of time to the affairs of the Board in the district and out of it. They could not ask him to neglect bis own work without adequate remuneration. -

The chairman asked for an expression of opinion from all the members.

Mr Mackay said,he was one of those who moved to increase the Engineer’s salary to £IOOO. If the chairman was going to do his duty, £250 was not too much.

Mr Seifert did not see how a man could take the position and work of chairman without neglecting his own affairs. He supported the motion. Mr Gunning said it was a business proposition. The chairman :vould have to side-track his own business. Mr Matheson said the members had enough confidence in Mr Monk’s fairness to know that at the end of the year hp would frankly say whether £250 was too much or whether they ought to pay less. Mr Barber said the chairman had accepted a grave responsibility, and would have to put a lot of time into the .work of the Board. Mr Kilsby was pleased to support the motion. The chairman would not have much left out of £250 at the end of twelve months. The motoin was unanimously car ried.