HARBOUR MATTERS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 418, 29 January 1909, Page 6

HARBOUR MATTERS.

BOARD'S "ANNUAL WASH-UP."

CHAIRMAN STATES A PARADOX. "PEOGRESS WITH EXTREME V CAUTION." ; ,; ..".Progress Tvith..extreme, caution", is..the most insupportable; of all forms of truthj because if is a paradox, buf ; it", was' the main note at yesterday's meeting of the Harbour Board, when a-good deal of time was taken up in a .general'discussion on the affairs of the .board,, including an: important statement of financial policy by the chairman, Mr. T. M. Wilford/M.P. The discussion touched on all the; principal subjects before the board, and some plain .speaking was indulged in.. : ! THE, CHAIRMAN OPENS... ' jv In moving-, the adoption of the ■' annual report arid accounts (which have ,been, published), the. Chairman., said the past year, bad been a strenuous one, having included I the Patent "Slip, negotiations, the Evans Bay ■negotiations/;the Evans Bay and Gas Company; -negotiations, the acquisition : ' of land at Evans Bay, wages readjustment, putting .the million loan Bill through Parliament, completion of -woodblpcking, introduction of new, signalling scheme, revision of. tariff, and new : wharf labourers''.award with: preference to unionists. (which the. board's. officers rer . ported. was; 'working without • any hitch so far). ..Matters for future consideration irj'cludedthe, lighting > question, .office accommodation, place for \ engagement of-. labour, proper facilities for tow grading, cool' storage, for cheese, and butter,. creation of an industrial 1 area" to the north or 'so/u.th.of. the city, ; a scheme'under the Local' Authorities' Superannuation Bill s creation of a Finance Committee':to deal, with. important financial, .matters,. .thV extension of- wharf accommodation, and-, increased charges on merchants, or ships.' It was a big programme, involving .huge, expenditure, not at once, but insthe future; a He did not counsel; rush" or hurry, but. all-these-'things would have to.be considered by .the -incoming board.;.. .. '. ' ... ,„> ■■.'.'■■.'■■■•^o,:lncrease in Charges. ,>,.,'■ ~'••': '. .He thoughtMtwould be well if-they could do withbut'any increase of the port'charges during th'e.'riert: twelve' months. ;The 'effect of the'increases'. recently 1 -made should first bo oarefully considered. .The decrease.in im-: .ports' meant, a'serious loss of revenue, to-the, ibbard; ■ -Thei i increased, taxation last year :resnlted.' : jn'..the.' board getting '£7865 iriore, and produced a , remarkable - equalisation of 'the payments,., the contributing £83,752,Varid the ships £83,571, the bulk of. ,the increase-having fallen on the merchants,' .The reputation of Wellington as the' cheapest! port; taking into consideration the facilities igiven and services'rendered by -the board/ could : ri6fbe"assailed. The stability- of' the sinking.'i funds 'was' unquestionable. tin' 34 : years;frpm now; oh : the present'basis of accumulations, and .contributions, the, £850,000. 'consolidated loan"'would be paid-.off. .The\ -'beard was 'in' a sound financial position; 1 "Its 'total assets were'. practically a million' ster■lingj and'the balance of. assets' over liabilities .was £333,177. In the 28 years of its history,' ithe'.bpard had written off £347,943 for depreciation.' They had.power to borrow under, the' old loan, without invoking the Bill of; last.year, Y£238,000, added ;tb:.which' ■there was,'in the' bank £70,000' oh. fixed de ; positj/niaking a total of £308,000 available. .Out-'pf -vtbiSj" £250,000 was earmarked for'the dock, but'this ;wquld be-extended over.i.a ' poriod.% *'■ ■ ■,-.";:"'; :'■:■■.. .'•:';.'. - : "... ■;':'•.- ■ - ; .-■■ '.'-'■':■ '.-. '■'.-. Current Year's Works. i ; . .After consulting the contractors, he: ,e : sti-. mated that 'the'■.expenditure ,'ori .works during the .current year would be -nearly £160,000. This included £15,000 for the Clyde ' Quay •Wharf, ■ :£l9jooo for .the .King's Wharf, £50,000 for the'dock, £4184' forthePetorie Wharf; hydraulic cranes and jiggers,-, Water•loo Quay reclamation, drainage, and. road formation, additions; to P and Z 'stores,' and acquisition.of"freehold.,at Evans;.Bay...' Hβ was satisfied that .the board could,carry.out the -''obligations already entered; into for, this financial year 'without" borrowing '■ any; mbnej ■ .under,the 'million loan-Bill.'! ,'. : ': ■-. ..'•• '■-■" :: " •;i;■■■;■ ";■: Bankers Against a Loan. V:-':"-"V 1 It would, be.almost impossible at ; present to .raise' money on good terms in. London,' and ; he, was 'authorised by the .hoard's bankers, to ;state'.that..in.their,;opinipn:the time was not opportune to go to the London money market for;a loan. This was based , on xabled ihfor- , ;mation'dated January. 22. The £70,000 ;on' jdepqsit in the .National Bank "was available -ato'nee'.", : The'sum'of £36,000'fe1l due'during, .the current year, with:no loss of interest. -There, iyere , unpledged debentures,- £'50,000,and all 'arrangements; had beenmade inre;gard;to,the dock by'past boards; Therec'ould be no'.'question that,wharf extension was re,quired,:;but:they;m,us.t recollect that the cost of.'the. riewi.wharf at, Pipitea,. would: ; ha. £135,000, and a certain proportion of .the work it would,provide.for would be: in the nature;of; diversion from other -wharves.'., ' ';..' ; 'A:',yaluable.As.set.': ;;, :';. , ; The board was not in;the happy position , of.'. having , an income •' from endowments like ■ other boards such as Auckland, 'which' had endowments worth half: a miUion sterling, > producing £17,000"per annum. Hβ agreea ■with a /suggestion made : by : the Hon.. Mr. ! 'Macdonald:, ihat; an' endeavour- should ,be ,made,to obtain 'some endowments from the Government. , ' The - board had,' however, in the: Waterloo Quay .reclamation ah. asset : was;yery'little'recognised,but which .would, become-valuable. The retaining wall cost; £20,000, rand further "work, -would ; ' ac-' count for £25,000 more, but when it was completed the board would have in'its possession after. selling-.sJ,'acres:to the. Government-for- , £20j000; ' arid'. providing' for' road and .'.railway access, , .-14J- acres for:its own use, the estimated yalue : of which'would- be'£lo7',Boo.' Inregard.tO;the Local Authorities'' Superannuation Act, the board might form a fund of its own or might' , combine with any other •local body,,bntin the latter-case-there would: be - a 'joint-and-several liability.' It, there-' fore, behovedtheboardto. keep, its eyes open to the position of the other- party to' any such marriage.-'., Before", anything else was done, the board must decide what contribution jt w,a3 prepared to give. , Theyhad to" provide, for works which were not interesteaniing., The .dock wbuld'absorb : this -year £40,000 : or, : £50,000, .which would .not be intere'st-earnihg.;..'for,-, some time to come. Therefore, ;hVthoughtthat they should'make no increased in thoir charges,. and ; borrow no.:mpney,r during .'.the current. year,. arid' should nierely go on with the.works in hand, and not plunge. "'He: would urge upon the .board ,;a:policy of progress with extreme caution. .'.■:;-■'- '..-'' ;; ■■ ; MR; FLETCHER'S RETROSPECT. ; R; T alluded to ■ the .retirement of r :Mr.;;\y. Fergusony which followed upon the speaker's'motion'in favour of members being, furnished- before each meeting with 'a full order paper, llr. Ferguson-had said that the carrying of -the motion 'showed' that he had lost the. confidence of the board,' but he accepted just .afterwards the post'of consulting engineer at £500 a year, and the speaker, fruitlessly'.'protested.- ■. In regard to the Patent Slip,:the outcome of the negotia-tions-was contrary'to a resolution of the 'board, and the dock-, site should have been .'moved there. The 'board should' have taken the property . cpnipulsorily. It was lost through, tho action of certain members of ...th'.e late board, when it could have \b't=en acquired for £25,000. For want of it, 'die board wpuld'riow have the Union S.S. Co. as a competitor. 'Continuing, Mr.. Fletcher repeated ! his' advocacy of' a purely Elective basis for the Harbour Board, and suggested .that rating-''powers be. conferred. In -regard to increase-of charges, he thought the time was inopportune.' The: effect of the last increase: had "not.been: fully studied.: It had been a: record.year for exports and imports,, yet the revenue hadnpt gone; up in proportion. . This was/due,- he. thought, to mismanagement "on tho wharf, 1 and if proper! economies,:were/effected,':there would-lje no., need-to'talk of increasing. the , charges. The iwhole'of.the yearly, revenue had been spent 'oh new.'works,' but this was unwise; ' Some should' have'been: kept in hand, and loan j money' used for: works instead. He suggested that when coal was transhipped over'the side of a .vessel at, a wharf to a hulk, the board should tnalie some charge, - .'. v., ' .'" ;

/Touching" on " the ' King's -Wharf,' Mr. Fletcher repeated his former arguments m favour ■ of- larger dimensions. ? The new Z store was also unfavourably criticised, us being quite unsuitable for a wool store. Wharf: Lighting. / Electric lighting on the Glasgow ..Wharf cost two-thirds more than it should. , Mr. Bichardson,-an expert, advised Mr. Ferguson to put in fifteen points, but the latter-insisted on fifty-seven,, which we're enough to light two or three more wharves. Tho cost was £865, whereas/£2BO or/£3OO should have/been sufficient. Mr! Fletcher read a,, letter., from Mr. Stuart Richardson confirming these statements, but emphasising the efficiency of the lighting and the • advantages, of electricity for. the purpose. Mr. Fletcher then went on to criticise the cost and utility of,. several of , the board's sheds and. gates, the woodblocking ; work, the onetime accumulator tower,, etc. '-"'_. OTHER SPEAKERS. " Mr. i M.' Cohen '. defended the present constitution.of the board against Mr.'Fletcher's -advocacy, of a change.- He held that the presence ot .country members had, been justified over and over again. There was a tendency to seek the support of .country producers for the development of other harbours on the West Coast, and the board should, therefore, pause before considering, a rating scheme. He '..considered ' that the grosg- revenue showed a substantial inorease. over the preyear,, and he questioned the amount of weight .to be attached to Mr. Fletcher's strictures, as a layman, (m the work of experts. If it were possible to ■do without" increased" charges, he would be as pleased .as .anybody,- but if increases must be made, he hoped care would be taken to' have the burden equitably distributed; '. ■ Mr. C. E. Daniell, contending against some-of Mr. Fletcher's strictures, said that the board would do well if it got , as good .value for future as for past, expenditure. . Patent Slip and Other Mattors. ~M . r- I , - G. Boltori defended the actione of the Tatent Slip/Committee, and said that it was generally conceded.that the board had made- a , good' bargain,'and r Mr.-" Fletcher's >vas the only dissentient voioa. The" increase ■ot rates; was .bound to be .'passed'on to 'the consumer,, and v if possible, the charges should not be increased during-the next'l2 months. He thought that, in justice'to the . oHiccr. responsible, Mr. Fletcher's allegation las to waste on the wharves .should,be investigated. -The speaker upheld " the right of■ members to criticise the work experts, and agreed with Mr. Fletcher that some features, of the. King's Wharf "would have to'bealtered. Changes. would ,have to be -made ' m \ % v l? ns of the Pi P i:t€a Wharf. He 6uge«ste/j' that 'the: City Electrical Enginelr .should ;be. asked to report .on. tho wharf .lighting question. ' • .' : - --- tV, Mr "-D ;■ ■^•' t M -'% n aid the of . the Patent ■ Slip Committee's work was the only onevpossiblo, and % committee was .ful^y.-justified.. :-Rather, than -'increasing charges,, he,- would: hkote' see. economies-ef-fected, if possible. '■■■ '■,- -.-••:■• ■ :--.-■■,■•. v _The Hon I'.Kennedy Macdonald,' speaking of the :Patent\Slip: negotiations', said it had .been .impossible to convince Parliament that the board should acquire (as he strongly felt)' immediate .control .of. the /-whole foreshore. ;Wise .men were content. with ..tho. most',they could get,;^and/the reversion, of the.property te.the board/at the end of 25 years was; .under the- circumstances, a: matter'for congrajfculatjon..';.. The. Union Company ■ would whip the cat" later on over the bargain; , v■;'.: ,Mr. Macdonald's Optimism. ■In regard to. the.' incidence' of.'proposed increases 'in.the oharges, he relied upon the representatives: of.- diiferent .interests on the board.te.bring about"a fair tjiing. He believed the .ships, did not now pay their fair share, but that should be investigated by. a committee. He thought the chairman was a L J 9 pessimistic- For his own part, he had no . fear for: the:'port 'of Wellington.' 'here might.be some diminution in imports, ;but. the .exports .would ' go' oh ..increasing " and; would be stimulated by the.opening of the, Main Trunk line. Progress could not be made ,by .the. port, or the,city.-dr,Jcountry on a policy of ."Go-slow." Though the-pre-sent might not be. the. best moment forgoing ".to the London money he ■ refused to believe that the board must continue to ■3it still and do nothing until it gofinto a 'hole financially. Referring to Mr. Fletcher's : statements as/to the' length, and widths of tho/new wharves,/ Mr.. Macdonald' said it ,was any competent observer that great, inconvenience' was caused. ■ A dray ■ could not be taken;down.the .King's Wharf.: The size of the sheds was all wrong. The statements madeby Mr. Fleteher'befijre tho work was .'done: had :beon fully proved, and .ho deserved the. thanks of. the ..board.; ;The, lighting of the.wharves, was a.disgrace to • the...- board. . Electricity was .far better : for : the-purpose', than/gas., :/.■■/•:/ ~ --<-: . -<' : Mr; J- G.Harkness commented on the "■ incroase of expenditure in .proportion .'to' re , - .ceip'ts.: He believed the imports'of this; year 'would-be , considerably less than i last year, though the exports, might increase. Hβ urged \tliat'-.'0n1y.. ; ahsolutely essential works should be: undertaken this year. - Inroroved .'wharf ilighting/;baths for workers, arid the •like.-should give precedence to the necessary provision for: trade and shipping. The prosecution; of the Clyde Quay: Wharf. should' be -retarded. /The board should: not try to borrow' a.single penny in London this year.. .: • ..'..'; THE ctjAIRMAN, IN'REPLY; ':■ The Chairman, defending himself against Mr. Macdonald's charge ;of r pessimism, said, one could not .attend and prepare , for. 67 out' ,df "the 68 meetings of the past year-without getting-a" grip of the position. Hβ realised his responsibilities as chairman. ■Hβ be.lieveditlie board could get money in London, but what he looked at was.'the-price, and he relied on the bank's advice. /He agreed with Mr. Harkness that permanent worke should , not be paid for out of revenue. The board had only £4600 of surplus revenue to.spend last year,'and £4000 of that had gone in the, v/ood-blocking.',/•: .•' .~- : !' "-.'■,-.'.. ;. .■; ' The report arid accounts were' adopted. 'V / ; , ELECTRiOITY V. ;OAS. / Mr. Fleteher subsequently/moved: .''That this-board;invite.the',City Council"to-'allow-the Electrical Engineer to report on thequestion.of lighting the;wharves by electricity and furnish an estimate of ; the cost,of same'.". ,v. : This was: seconded., by Mr..; Bolton, ■ but : in the ensuing discussion was amended by the. addition, of words providing, for a similar report from , tho Wellington Gas Company.:' ".-■■ ' The ". 'as amended, : was. .unanimously adopted. v . j,. ;' . ' •.'.' :