LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIII, Issue 21, 22 May 1912, Page 3

LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

THE HILL DISCUSSED

(Per Press Association.)

Wellington, May 21

The conference, on resuming at

p.m., proceeded to discuss ti c Bill. Mr Lee, Wellington, said that there was a,good deal in the Bill that deserved consideration. There was certainly much food for reflection in the part dealing with education. He was satisfied that a good deal of money could be saved by merging many of the smaller boards.

Mr C. J. Parr, Auckland, said that there was no demand for such a Bill so far as the large cities wore concerned. They objected to be incorporated into largo provinces.. They objected to a provincial rate which may be expended forty or fifty miles away. A fair cardinal matter to solve was' that of overlapping.

Mr Garland, Auckland, said that a

suitcl finance had been mentioned 1 >.> the Minister, hut there was no prevision for it in the Bill. He suggested that the land and income tax should lie set apart by the (.1 overtime nt for that purpose. Mr A. E. dull, Hawke’s Bay,’sjiid that tin 1 principle they were seeking was identical with that which /the County Association had been seCkinh: for years. They had found tjiat what they wanted was the abolition of dual control. The question of franchise had to he faced. Cities had practically a parliamentary franchise, hut in the country the position existing enabled one section to dominate the electors to harbour hoards and other bodies. He suggested a residential and property franchise, the cities to work under a

similar franchise, Mr J. Bailey. Waikato, said that if the Government sought to abolish local bodies the local bodies would abolish the Government.

Mr E. Billiton, Wanganui, thought that the Bill was too revolutionary. Mr A. Moore, Kaiapoi, objected to the Bill, as it tended to take power out of the hands of those elected by the people and place it in the hands of the Minister. He opposed the policy of education under provincial councils, or other bodies who have to'do with the administration of roads and bridges. Mr Moore held that the cost would be increased ,and administration would bo increased and would be less satisfactory.

Mr Russell at this juncture said that Mr Moore had said that the desire underlying the Bill' was to abolish the present system of education. “I ask you,” he said, “whether, in view of the statement made by the Prime Minister this morning, if that is a fair observation to put on record and have circulated throughout the country?— (Members: No.) —As far as the Bill is concerned I might point out that it did not emanate from the present Government. It has been placed before' you as the basis of discussion. Ido not think it right for any delegate to 'put the matter before you in the

way Mr Moore has done.” Mr J. C. Wilson thought that there was not very much wrong with the present local government laws. They certainly might merge smaller bodies with advantage. In his opinion, the time had not arrived for the establishment of provincial councils.

Mr Schofield, Auckland, said, with, regard to lessening the cost of local government, that he thought the Minister could not, reduce the cost of hospitals hclow the present figure. Mr McLaren, Wellington, thought that the powers delegated to local go-

vernrnent boards under the Bill would be too great.

Mr E. W. Venn, Wellington, offered a suggestion that aspirants for Parliamentary honours should serve four years on a city, borough or county council before standing. Mr Dalziel, North Canterbury, thought that primary, education should he the first charge on the revenue of the country. Mr •). Nash, Palmerston, wondered

whether the (lovernmcnt was afraid to grapple with the subject. He thought I provincial councils were quite umieces- | sarv things. They were going on I very well at present, with a few exceptions. I Mr F. Horrcll, North Cantcrhury, ! considered that the discussion had ljc.cn I in the direction of indicating that the | Bill conducted neither to economy, efficiency nor good government. Per- • son ally, he thought that many small '/ hoards in his own district could very I well be abolished—not because ex-

ponses were so large, but because uunecesSiWy work was created. Mr J. Wilson, Dunedin, suggested that the town planning should bo gone in for from three to six miles round. Mr 0. Harley, Nelson, Urged that counties -should be reduced by twothirds. He would bring them down to forty or fifty* Mr W. Maslin, South Canterbury, agreed with the sentiments expressed by Mr Harley as far as the educational clause was concerned. The Bill was a single tax one, worthy of that apostle of the new evangel, Mr Fowlds. it was of a confiscatory character, and would impede land values to the extent of 50 per cent. The conference adjourned at 5.15 p.m. till 10 a.m. to-morrow.