The Daily News. TUESDAY, MAY 31. THE BOROUGH FINANCES.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 43, 31 May 1910, Page 4

The Daily News. TUESDAY, MAY 31. THE BOROUGH FINANCES.

One of the most useful members of the Borough Council is Councillor Dockrill. Cautious by nature, lie acts in the way of a brake upon the municipal coach, and it would not be for want of applying pressure on his part if the coach ever got out of hand. The other evening he made some pertinent remarks concerning the state of the finances. In effect he stated that if the estimates were exceeded this year as they had.been during the -past two years, ratepayers would be confronted with a liability that could only be liquidated by the imposing of a stiffer rate. Also, that if it had not been for the substantial earnings of the electric light department the Council's finances would be in a bad way. As it is, he considers that the revenue account

is in debt to the amount of £2400. By this he means that the revenue account should repay the £I7OO it has com-J mandeered from the electric light department and the £3OO from the abattoir 'balance. Of course, the Council is within its rights in treating the profits of the two departments named as revenue. Whether it is wise to do so at the present juncture is another and different matter. We believe the Council is pursuing an imprudent policy in thus utilising the electric light funds. The plant has not been written down a penny, outside of the sinking fund amount, and, as everyone knows, nothing depreciates in value more than electrical machinery. The department should be run as a private company would run it. What private electrical company would think of charging no depreciation to the profit and loss account? And what company would make repairs and renewals a charge on the capital account? The Council has no compunction about doing either. The funds are simply annexed to pay pressing, liabilities. We hold that proper allowance should be made for depreciation, a small part of the profits used for extending the service, and the remainder placed to the credit of the general fund. The other point, namely, that of exceeding the estimates in street maintenance, is an important one, and calls for the consideration of every ratepayer. Last year the engineer expended t'7so over the amount' voted; the previous ' year £IOOO. Is « continuance of the same thing to be permitted? Tf so, the Council had better make no pretence of estimating the requirements of the 'borough, but leave the whole thing to the engineer. It is manifest that the ideas of the Council and the engineer regarding the requirements of the borough in this respect do not coincide. One can understand the estimates being exceeded by £IOO or so, but to reach a total of £1750 in two years is beyond all reason. Our view is that councillors should have THE say in the expenditure of the ratepayers' money and, exercise a greater control over the operations of the engineer, who should not be 'allowed to exceed the estimates in the wholesale mariner in which he has been doing of late. We hold there is no necessity for this big expenditure, and protest against the .perpetuation of a condition of things that must lead to the imposition of an increased rate or overload the overdraft. Of the borough street work itself we will probably have .something to say at a later period. We would merely add here that whilst the present extravagance is indulged in, the Mayor lias no hope of obtaining the sanction of the ratepayers to the loan he spoke of proposing for completing street formation, providing a smoother surface for motorists, etc., even if the law allowed such a thing, which we very much doubt.