NEW CITY ENGINEER

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 851, 20 December 1929, Page 11

NEW CITY ENGINEER

TASK OF SELECTION OUTSIDE AID INVOKED Although it is five weeks since the City Council first began the task of selecting a new City engineer, no finality has yet been reached. The council last evening argued the question for an hour and ahalf and finally decided to submit the six names tentatively selected by a special committee for report by the chief engineer of Public Works ar.d the director of town planning. The committee had resolved upon these six names: E. H. Barber, deputy-engineer and surveyor, Sheffield, England. A. G. Bush, borough engineer, Lower Hutt. A. It. Galbraith, city engineer, Christchurch. J. Tyler, acting-city engineer, Auckland. N. W. Weekes, private practice (formerly city engineer, Sydney). S. A. Hill-Willis, engineer and surveyor, Tilbury Urban District Council, England. Opposing the move, Cr. Grey Campbell argued that the proposal should have been made at the beginning. The idea was not followed in other cities and there were instances where men of high academic qualification failed in practice. EXPERT ADVICE Cr. Ellen Melville moved that the selection be deferred until the six names could be inspected by the Chief Engineer of Public Works, and the Director of Town-Planning. “We have no engineers among our number,” said Cr. Melville, “and we ought to have expert advice.” Cr. G. G. Ashley seconded on the ground that the councillors, as laymen, were not in a position to choose an engineer without having technical knowledge. The task was somewhat beyond the council. In supporting Cr. Melville, Cr. G. W. Hutchison suggested the replacing of the name of Mr. P. W. Eurkert, the Public Works engineer, as a member of the inquiring expert committee, with the name of Mr. G. T. Murray, former Public Works engineer. The reason was that Mr. Furkert had already recommended an applicant. The position seemed illogical, remarked Cr. F. N. Bartram. “Why should engineers select engineers?” he asked. “It’s the same as suggesting that parsons should choose parsons and cax'penters, carpenters.” Voices: So they do. Cr. H. P. Burton was amazed that councillors should want the question further delayed. To propose that the selection should be relegated to outside opinion was to tread on dangerous ground. He would say quite frankly that they had in their midst one whose value they did not appreciate. Cr. Burton thought little of the word, “qualifications.” He believed a man’s proper recommendation consisted of 60 per cent common sense and 40 per cent technical knowledge. At 11.50 p.m. the Mayor, Mr. G. Baiidon, suggested that owing to the lateness of the hour the meeting adjourn until the next evening. “FINISH IT NOW” After some discussion, Cr. Melville said, “Finish the debate now; it won’t kill anybody to sit for another halfhour.” Cr. J. Dempsey recommended that if it was decided to adjourn the date should be fixed for February. The right to speak there and then was claimed by Cr. A. J. Entrican, who supported Cr. Melville. “X am not of the same opinion as ‘ Cr. Burton,” said Cr. T. Bloodwortli, in strongly advocating outside assistance. He was not shirking, and was prepared to vote then if necessary. That if it was proper to submit the six names to experts it was also right to present the whole 75 applicants, was the argument of Cr. E. ;T. Phelan, who felt the council should be bold enough to make its own choice, “I have spent 38 hours 17 minutes in reading the applications, and I am the only one who has read the whole 75,” said Cr. J. K. Lundon. “Cr. Burton has particularised and I will do the same,” he proceeded. “The name of Mr. J. W. Blackman has most wrongfully been omitted. He has the highest academic qualifications the world can offer, and his experience has been magnificent.” The speaker said that the selection committee which had deliberated for two and a-quarter hours could not hope to have made a just selection. Cr. Melville’s amendment was carried by 12 votes to 10, the division being: Ayes,—Crs. Murray, Donald, Coyle, Bagnall, Brownlee, Melville, Basten, Bloodwortli, Lundon, Ashley, Hutchison and Entrican. Noes.—The Mayor, Crs. Phelan, Casey, Paterson, Bennett, Campbell, Dempsey, Burton, Bartram and Irvine. ARGUED WITH MAYOR Cr. Lundon then attempted to move the amendment that the question be deferred until February, and that certain names be added. He was promptly ruled out of order and fired off more proposal.; and argued with the Mayor. Finally he moved that the matter stand adjourned until the first meeting in February. At half-past twelve Cr. Melville rose to protest that a serious business was being made a farce by Cr, Murray. That councillor looked hurt, and Cr. Lundon said, amid laughter, that he objected to being called Cr. Murray. The amendment was rejected and Cr. Melville’s proposal sustained by 1(1 votes to 6.