THE WAIMAKARIRI.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 18894, 8 January 1927, Page 17

THE WAIMAKARIRI.

10 THB IDITO* or THI TEES 3. Sir. A word or two in reply to Mr Chnstall. I don t think it should have been necessary for mo to say that I used tho word "narrow" in a comparative sense. Cook .Strait is narrow in relation lo the Pacific Ocean! When Mr Chrvstall says the new cutcan never be swift because "there is no grade" he merely betrays his ignorance. A layman may be excused for thinking that If water will run swiftly along two sides of a triangle it would run more swiftly across the third side. Mr Chrystall might, try his hand at writing "Funny Stories."—Yours, cU:., GEORGE GOULD. January 7th. 10 THE EDITOE 0/ THB I'KESS. Sir,—l have known the Waimakariri river sinco 1870, and have ta.ken a keen interest in the subject of its control. The old River Board kept the river within reasonable bounds fairly well, at a small cost, under the management of the overseers (Jeals, father and son), until tho Trust was formed, in 19J2, by hasty legislation a Bill was passed, but the ratepayer turned down the loan proposals, and again last year more hasty legislation was brought in, and tho three-fifths majority previously provided was cut down to a baro majority for tho solo purpose of assisting the carrying of the £200,000 loan. But havo we any guarantee that twice that amount may not be required to complete tho scheme;'' A largo amount of money is being spent outside tho scheme, which the ratepayers will havo to find. Surely it would bo better to delay tho expenditure of tho proposed loan until tho best advico procurable is obtained. If there were a large obstruction at the Bank of Now Zealand corner 1 do not think the City Council would pull down tho Bank and United Service Hotel. They would remove the obstruction, and that should be the first work in the riverbed. The rocks under the railway bridgo should bo removed, and the islands created cleared out. If dredged, much of tho lighter stuff would wash out to sea, and the heavier could be used for the banks, and town and country could be supplied with shingle for roads and buildings. The cutting down of willows in the river only makes them bind moro closely, intensifying the obstruction. They should be removed, root and all. Soon the overhead charges will be more per annum than it cost to control formerly. The so-called reclamation of land will bo of little value in our time. It would be better to purchase some of tho land than to try and protect it at a cost of many times its value. The trend of the river is north-east, and with proper caro it will not come south. Tho scare map produced by the Trust itself shows that years before the white man came here tho river's trend was north. We seom to liave had more scares and floods lately than ever wo had. Both sides of the river must be protected. Before undertaking this tremendous expenditure wo should have the best engineering and practical skill available, and with all due respect to the advice of the experts who have advised tho Trust, their special abilities have not been identified, so far as I know, with river control. I know how a mighty river liko the Molyneux has been deviated by dredging, and I think dredging is the solution of tho problem of tho Waimakariri, »nd dredging can be carried out at much less cost than the proposal. Making cuts in loose ground is dangerous when dealing with swift rivers.—Yours, etc., GEORGE WITTY.

TO Tax EDITOR 01 THS PRESS Sir, —It is interesting to note the belated concern of Mr D. G. Sullivan, M.P., for the ratepayers of the City of Christckurch in connexion with the affairs of the Waimakariri Trust. He would certainly have been entitled to some appreciation had he seen to it that the interests of Christchurch ratepayers were properly safeguarded in the matter of representation and ratnig when the first Trust .Bill was being passed by Parliament. Had he and his confreres doiit their duty, Christchurch would not have occupied the unjust and anomalous position it does today. It is a cardinal principle that there should be no taxation without representation. The City of Christchurch has to pay practically twothirds of the rates levied by the Trust, but up to the present has had 110 direct representation on the Board. The great majority of ratepayers in the City are workers and small prop-erty-owners. One would have expected that these would have been the Bpecial care of such a democrat as Mr Sullivan claims to be. Nevertheless, it does not appear that he ever did anything to remedy this inequitable and unjust state of affairs. Even when an opportunity presented itself last session, when the Trust's Amending Bill was before Parliament, providing for loan proposals to be passed by a simple majorityj as is the case with boroughs, and altering the constitution of the membership of the Trust Board by dividing tho Southern Area into three divisions: (a) Christchurch City and Eiccarton, three members; (b) New Brighton Borough and Waimairi County, one member; (c) Paparua County, one member; one would have expected that such a democratic stalwart as Mr Sullivan is supposed to be would have used every means available to secure justice for the ratepayers of Christchurch, including as they do such a large proportion of the workers of the City, in the direction of adequate representation and equitable adjustment of taxation in connexion with the Trust. Instead of his discharging his duty in this matter, it was left to other interested ratepayers to agitate for fairer representation, resulting in four members being allotted to the Christ-church-Eiccarton area. Even this number is not equitable—it ought to be not less than six. Had Mr Sullivan been 011 the alert, as a Member of Parliament should be, ho could have attempted to secure an alteration in the date of the election from that prescribed in tho Rive r Boards Act to that prescribed for municipal bodies as is the case with Harbour Boards

ami Hospital Boards. (Perhaps he didn't know how the date of the election was fixed). It is all very well for Mr Sullivan to profess such concern for tho people as he does. Let him show his sincerity by closer attention to his duties as a Member of Parliament. It is a well-known fact that in his case, Parliamentary duties seriously conflict with those of a City Councillor. His record of attendances as a Councillor at Council and Committee meetings is one of the poorest. No one can be in two places at once Already about £66,000 has been levied by way of rates by the Trust, of which about £48,000 has been contributed by the ratepayers of Christchurch, the bulk of which has been spent on the north bank of the river in carrying out works, mauy of which were provided for in the 'loan proposals rejected iu April last. This fact alone shows how important it is that members should be elected to the new Board who wjll investigate the position 111 all its bearings, and not accept, nolus bolus, the schemes adopted bv the present Board.

It is to be hoped that the new Board will consist of members, who by their past services and record Have proved themselves worthy of being

entrusted with the responsibility of discharging su<sh important duties as attached to the Waimakariri Trust Board.—Yours, etc., CHRISTCHURCH RATEPAYER,