TOO MANY MEETINGS

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 947, 14 April 1930, Page 1

TOO MANY MEETINGS

POWER BOARD EXPENSES ATTACKED NO CHANGE IN SYSTEM Holding that th© small number of extensions and the extremely close margin of profit allowed in th© year’s estimates do not justify the number of meetings of th© Waitemata ElectricPower Board, Mr. W. B. Darlow, at a meeting this morning, moved that in future the board meet in open council one© a fortnight. Last year there were 62 meetings of the full board and of committees. “Wo are sailing too close to the wind in our finances to allow the same amount to b© spent this year in payments and in the travelling expenses of our members,” said Mr. Darlow. “The secretary himself, in his annual report, states that the margin of profit allowed for th© coming year, £2BO, is not altogether prudent.” Mr. Darlow referred to a table of comparison between th© main boards of the Dominion, which showed that th© Waitemata board is costing the most of any in New Zealand. The board met 62 times, against an average of 22 by the other bodies, and spent a total of £1,090 in payments and travelling expenses for members, as against an average of £462. The board's expenditure was £260 more than that of the Auckland ElectricPower Board, which has an annual income ten times as large. Mr. Darlow pointed out that* the Waitemata board alone provided a motor-car for the chairman’s use, and also gave cars to the engineers. Auckland allows only £SO toward the chief engineer’s car. “We are being very generous with other people's money,” he commented. PERCENTAGE TOO HIGH Including a sum he calculated as £2OO yearly for the chairman’s cax\ the board spent 1.45 per cent. of its revenue in administration, representing about half of its profits. On the same scale the Auckland Power Board would spend £9,000 annually. It had been pointed out that t>e administration was costing only a sni-.1l percent - age of receipts, but this did not alter the fact that it was costing too much. “It is like a man who has stolen £IO,OOO from the Treasury excusing his offence on the grounds that the sum was equal to only l£d a head on th© total population,” said Mr. Darlow. The number of meetings of special committees was also attacked by the speaker. He said that all kinds of piffle had to be introduced to spin out th© business.

The Rev. W. P. Rankin objected to the minor questions being referred to as “piffle,” but Mr. Darlow retorted that the minutes of the general purposes committee would bear him out. Ono special committee of laymen had been set up to consider a question which should have been dealt with by th© competent staff of engineers employed by the board. This was surely a waste of public money. In seconding the motion, Mr. G. O’Hall ora n mode it clear that he disassociated himself from the reasons advanced by Mr. Darlow. but he believed the business could be covered satisfactorily in fortnightly meetings.

When the motion was put to the board. Mr. 11. A. Robertson alone voted with the mover and seconder, the prolosU - . -■—