CIVIC WASTE CHARGES

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 277, 13 February 1928, Page 1

CIVIC WASTE CHARGES

Request Made For Commission To Go Forward Immediate NEW ALLEGATIONS MADE THOUGH still considering that the allegations made by Councillor W. H. Murray are too indefinite, the Finance Committee of the City Council this morning decided to press the Government to hold an inquiry into the allegations of engineering and civic waste in Auckland.

rjVHE committee had before it the letter from Mr. F. D. McLiver, counsel for Councillor Murray, which came before the council at Its last meeting, but which, it transpired, did not contain the allegations in the more specific form as desired by the council. * MORE ALLEGATIONS The letter added the following to the previous list of allegations, which the council considered inadequate: (1) The sale of a launch and punts for £350 to, I think, a Mr. Daniels; (2) The loss to ratepayers on the activities at the Zoo in respect of the care, maintenance and disposal of animals and birds therein; and (3) Loss to the ratepayers in the method of formation of roads and in the execution of council works. Mr. McLiver referred at some length to “formulating the charges” and the complaint of delay, and stated that on two occasions appointments were made by Mr. J. Stanton, city solicitor, which Mr. Stanton could not keep, so that the delay was outside Mr. McLlver’s control. Had these facts b|pen made known to The Sun, comment would not have been made in the strain it was. On the subject of “definite charges,” Mr. McLiver stated that it was impossible to give further details. The special committee had already heard considerable evidence and it was no doubt because of the significance of this evidence that the committee decided to ask for an investigation. Mr. Murray had offered matters which, in his opinion, required investigation and were definite enough. ATTEMPT AT DELAY Mr. McLiver suggested that the request for “definite • charges” when definite grounds for'lnvestigation had been accepted, hji.d, 'partly dealt with, was a possible attempt to delay or prevent investigation. Concluding, Mr.-McLiver pointed out that, the commission having been asked for, Tt, was -a matter for the council . to control,- but Mr. Murray would be pleased' to' assist. He concluded that, the council having asked for the commission, the council would meet the cost. “Do you think, under the regrettable circumstances, it would be advisable to ask Mr. McLiver to be present this morning?” asked Cr. J. A. C. Allum, when the committee met. The Mayor: Why? Cr. Allum: Will we have one professional man practically calling another a liar? CITY SOLICITOR’S VERSION Mr, Stanton's attitude was explained by him. He said the letter finally came from Mr. McLiver after repeated written and verbal requests that Mr. McLiver should formulate Cr. Murray’s charges in a form suitable for submission to the Government. He had pointed out to Mr. McLiver that the document placed before the committee was not sufficiently definite to place before the Government. Mr. McLiver had said he could and would put such a document In his hands within a week if the council decided to ask for a commission. This was reported to the council by the chairman of the committee, Cr. J. Dempsey, and was supported by Cr. Mur.fr. Mr. McLiver had rung and said he would like to see Mr. Stanton and a conference was arranged for a tiiio which Mr. Stanton Was later u.\>/j to keep, but he saw Mr. McLiver the same day, Mr. Jacobs (solicitor for Mr. Matheson, a council employee), being present at the later part of the interview. Mr. McLiver said "he did not see how he was going to make the allegations more definite, and Mr. Stanton pointed out- several cases where the legations could be made more definite, and left the question to Mr. McLiver. Mr. Stanton suggested that the whole document and allegations should be remodelled. After that Mr. Stanton wrote and rang Mr. McLiver, . and there was no suggestion from Mr. McLiver at any further stage that he was w-aiting for Mr. Stanton for anything. Mr. McLiver’s letter, he said, was an absolute travesty of the facts. TIME FOR SIFTING Cr. Allum said his fear was that all this material would go to Wellington, and the officials wpuld merely turn it down, and there w-ould be no inquiry. The council wanted the inquiry, and would have to urge the Government to bold the inquiry, even if the material did not appear to he sufficient. Cr. S. I. Crookes said they must do everything* in their power to push for the investigation. It was time that • the whole thing was sifted to the bottom. Mr. Stanton remarked that the time must come when the charges must be made definite, otherwise it would continue for ever. THE COSTS QUESTION He raised the question of costs, members agreeing that the eommissron must deride this. If the charges were trivial the council would object to paying the costs. If an official was found guilty he would have to meet portion of the costs with the council. “Do you want Mr. Murray to pro-

ceed as he did before the committee?' asked Mr. Stanton, Quoting from Mr McLiver’s letter.

A Voice: No. (Laughter.l It -was decided to leave this question to the commission. As to the three insinuations in the letter, it was decided to again point out to Mr. McLiver that the council did not consider them a proper way of setting out the charges. Cr. A. J. Entrican pointed out that there had been a report that steps were being taken to distribute the evidence taken by the committee. As the evidence was quite one-sided at present steps, such as an injunction, should be taken to prevent it being published further until after the commission. This question was left to the city solicitor, Cr. Ellen Melville considering that it was useless to try to follow every step Mr. Murray and his advisers too. Mr. Murray was merely prejudicing his position. MUD-THROWING Cr. Allum: What about the fellows the mud is being thrown at? If they are found culpable it is all right; if not, the position is quite different. Cr. Melville; Our weakness at present is that these statements have got a couple of months' start. Not the evidence given before the committed but the fact that he considered the chairman of the committee was being grossly insulted, and the inability of the committee to get evidence if the witnesses declined to speak, were given by Cr. Allum as his reason for supporting an inquiry by a Government judicial officer. On the motion of the Mayor it was decided to press for an inquiry, to request that the Press be admitted, and that the commission deal with procedure and costs.