When the House adjourned last night, I was arguing that this Bill teems with items purporting to refer to local bodies under which it is assumed that local bodies will have some control. This amendment was designed with the object of giving local bodies some actual power. The Parliamentary Secretary said that it was an attempt to amend the Managerial Act. I do not know that that was the intention of the proposal. But if somebody had proposed an amendment to that effect, it would at least have had my hearty support. During the discussion of the Managerial Act it was again and again reiterated by the Minister in control that local bodies were secured in the eventual control of practically everything, inasmuch as they had control of finance. Time and again in the discussion of that Bill that was guaranteed by the Minister. Some Deputies on this side of the House had their doubts, but they were persuaded by the Minister that there was no need for doubt, that the Bill preserved the rights of local bodies to the full in regard to the financial control of items under their administration. It was argued that the Managerial Act would not result in taking any great powers from the local bodies; that in controlling the purse they naturally would control most of the administration. Subsequently, it transpired that that guarantee was not worth very much. Local bodies discovered that whatever powers they thought they had were being taken from them one by one, until eventually it was made clear that the last semblance of control they had over finance had vanished, so that they were left with nothing.
Almost everything has been said on this amendment that could be said, but I should like to tell the Minister that it is not an attempt to amend the Managerial Act. It is an attempt, as I see it, to bring local bodies back into the Bill. They are mentioned several times in the Bill, but it is merely a verbal reference. They have no power to do anything, to control anything or to advise on anything, and it is in an effort to bring them into the Bill that this amendment is put forward. Deputies on all sides who have any regard for the privileges of local bodies ought to be in favour of it. It does not take from the Bill—rather it strengthens it.
Most of us have in mind the financial clauses of the Bill and their effect on the ratepayers in general. If the representatives of the ratepayers on the local bodies have not got some say in the matter of the expenditure under the Bill, goodness only knows what the rates will be eventually. The trend of legislation in this House has been more and more to pass on to local bodies items of expenditure which really ought to be provided for from the Central Fund, and the country generally is fearful that a continuation of that policy will result in the eventual breakdown of local administration. If the present policy of passing these items on to local bodies is continued, it is bound to result, sooner or later, in the inability of local authorities to meet their obligations and in a breakdown of local administration. We on this side are desirous of having some semblance of authority vested in the local bodies, and, in a last attempt to achieve that object, this amendment is brought forward.