BALANCE-SHEET “TAGS.”

Gisborne Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 3303, 23 August 1911, Page 5

BALANCE-SHEET “TAGS.”

AUDIT OFFIGE AND BOROUGH COUNCIL. PAYMENT OF MR. LYSNAR’S TRIP HOME. THE PATUTAHI TRAM AJJD THE LOAN. A portion of the works committee’s report was responsible for an unexpected development at tlie Borough Council meeting last night. The paragraph in the report was as follows: “A letter from the Auditor-Gene-ral, re the question of the Patutahi tramway being constructed out of ' loan money and payment of the Mayor’s expenses, was considered, when it was resolved that the. matter be referred to the’ Borough Solicitors, to draft a letter of reply, m conjunction with the Mayor and 'Cr. Pettie.”

Cr. Collins asked where the letter from the Auditor-General was. He had not seen it, and he wished that the letter should be read. • v The Mayor stated that the. Council would have to go into committee to consider the letter.

The letter was handed by the Town Clerk to Cr. Collins, who, after perusing* it, asked, “Are you going to publish this letter, your Worship?” The Mayor said he thought it would be unwise to publish the letter. Ct. Collins: The letter is public property. It is a public letter direct from the Government to tlie ratepayers of this town, and I would not take the responsibility of withholding this letter if I were you, your Worship. Ci*. Collins moved that the letter be published. This was seconded by Cr. Darton.

The Mayor: We are now on tlie question of the works committee’s report. Ci*. Collins: Yes, but this comes under the head of Patutahi tramway in the report, and I therefore move the motion.

Cr. Sawyer moved as an -amendment that the letter be considered in committee, and then if necessary published. , Cr. Wade seconded the amendment.

Tlie Mayor explained that the letter had already been before the committee, and had been referred to the Borough Solicitors. The letter was as follows: August 8, 1911. To the Borough Treasurer, Gisborne.

Sir,— Gisborne Borough Balance-sheet, 1911. —Before I can certify to your balancesheet, I should be glad to know what action your Council proposes vo cake to bring the matters hereafter mentioned into conformity with the law. I make the references in order of the elates of your replies to the Audit Inspector’s queries on the subjects. Tramway to Quarry.—-Your letter of 26th, June states that the Engineer was asked to report in order “to ascertain the most economical method of haulage of metal,” and “after due consideration (presumably of the report), the Council decided that the light tramway was the best means of coping with their requirements, therefore it was decided that the quarry line be undertaken out of loan money.” Now the Engineer’s report does not appear to classify the tramway as. the most economical, but as No. 2 in that respect. It is, moreover, not based on calculations as to the _ present loan works, but on the requirements of the district in future and in general. Assuming,* however, that these objections are. waived, I am met, as I understand the case, with a still more formidable one, namely, that after having apparently, on the plea of economy, ancl without statutory authority, utilised loan moneys on a purpose for which they were 'not raised, as no reference was made to the money being spent on a tramline in the proposals submitted in the voting paper to the ratepayers, your Council by resolution now proposes to mulct this loan in the difference between the new economic method and the old (say expensive) one in order to finance the authorised tramline (that is, they propose to charge the loan works 2s 6d per yard more than the actual cost in order to square the amount of moneys of which they'have been deprived), when the -metal haulage, so far as the loan works in question are concerned, have been supplied at the cheaper rate by an outlay of £3OOO (see Engineer’s schedule of haulage, order of economy No. 1). Payment of £BOO to the Mayor.— Will your Council also kindly state how it proposes to reconcile its action in this matter with sections- 42 and 44 of “The' Municipal Corporations Act, 1908” ? I can see no reason .why the Audit Office should oppose payment of the actual voucher expenses of the Mayor as agent for the Council, but a specific sum paid under a deed of contract (see section 42h) “on ine uibtinct understanding that the expenses of the Mayor and his family were to be paid” (your letter of Ist July is a quite different matter), and involves serious consideration on my part as to what action must be taken.

I have the honor to be, Sir, your obedient servant, R. J. COLLINS, Controller and Auditor-General. Cr. Collins asked whether they were cognisant of the correspondence that had passed between Mr. Younghusband and the Council office. It had been going on since June last. The Mayor said that the Audit Department communicated with the Town Clerk on little matters. Or. Collins: Do you consider this is a little matter. The Mayor: Perhaps I was' wrong in saying little. Or. Collins 6aid that the matter was of serious import to tihe Council, and he could not conceive how any. member of the Council could justify his action in allowing these letters, which were the property of the ratepayers, to be under the cover of seci’ecy. The responsibility of such an action was very very great, and he for one would not be a party to it. There was correspondence dating from last June 29th. He thought the letter should be published. Furthermore, he would not be put into a false position by the. withholding of the letter. There were a, number of Councillors who were not on the Council when these matters mentioned in the correspondence were dealt with. They would liave a perfect- right to move that it be not made public. The other Councillors in their own interests should publish the letters. He had no idea, of the position previously. ■ Cr. Dartoh: I have never, read them. Cr. Collins: There is a distinct iesponsability. Cr. Sawyer moved' tiia- the letter be referred bade to the committee for further consideration; 'The' Council, he

said, could then, if necessary, hand, the letter to the press. Cr. Wade seconded the amendment. He thought it would be better to discuss this matter in committee*. There was no harm in discussing it in committee. Cr. Collins: No, there would be no harm. The Mayor: The last letter has been considered by tire committee, and I understand Cr. Collins only wishes to publish the last letter. Cr. Collins: That is ail. 1 would not dare to publish the whole of the letters. Cr. Sawyer again said lie thought it would be better to again refer the matter back to the committee. The Mayor pointed out that the matter had bee needrrefrremzpeae ter 'had been referred to the committee and solicitors, and they had received a. reply. Cr. Collin® said that if the Council would 1 not agree to the publication of the letter he would take, a copy and would publish it under his own name. He would not- hold his seat on the Council and have- the letter withheld. They had; no right to withhold it from the ratepayers of this town. He certainly would not ask anyone to publish all these letters, because he thought they would do more harm than good. If they withheld the letter' a- copy might be taken and thrown in’ their faces.Cr. Barton: It is- a pity it did not come before the Council before. The Mayor pointed out that the matter as far fl-s the Town Clerk was concerned! was satisfactory, and could be explained. Cr. Collins said that the letter should not be withheld. It was purely a policy matter for which- individual members ■were responsible. There were letters passing/ between the Auditor-General and the Council office on matters of grave import, and Councillors had never known of their existence. That was not right. The amendment was lost by 5 votes to 2, and the motion was carried, Crs. Sawyer and Wade being in the minority.