WATER POWER RIGHTS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 679, 2 December 1909, Page 5

WATER POWER RIGHTS.

REPORT BY COMMITTEE. ~ INTERESTING . DISCUSSION IN', HpUSB. j The question of the water power ■. regulations was threshed out in the' House of Representatives yesterday afternoon. . . Mr. Poland (Ohinemuri) rend tho report. of the Goldfields and Mines Committee oa a large number, of petitions which represented, tbo importance of utilising the power'of the'river waters of tho Dominion,now running to waste. It was urged by tho petitioners, that tho imposition of any chargo or rent upon tho employment of water used for mining purposes Was an unjust discrimination. . They submitted that every encouragement should be given by tho Government for tho investment of capital-in the opening and equipping of new fields of industry, especially on idle and abandoned goldfields. Large cash deposits prior to the flotation of hydro-electric sluicing 'Companies were stated to be effectual deterrents to enterprise. They, therefore, prayed that tho Public Works Amendment Act and the regulations, thereunder be amended so that tho power to grant licenses to use water on the goidfields be vested in the warden. The committee reported that they recommended that the petitions as set forth bo referred to. thel Government' for consideration. x Mr. Poland moved to refer tho report to tho Government. ' . ■ : '

,'. . The Regulations Criticised. Mr. Seddon (Wostland)' made a strong speech in support of. tho report, contrasting the Government's action in this matter with ; their assistance to the gravitation system. .The company in question,-with the Wnihi Company, was a pioneer of this form of, development in New Zealand. It had been said that the companies on the coast were likely to establish'a monopoly, but he had no'objection to the Minister limiting the amount of water that might be used for generating electricity and fixing a.price for the sale of electricity or water by the companies for mining purposes. Mr. Herdman (Wellington North) congratulated the committee on their report. A policy which placed unnecessary restrictions on persons who desired to utilise the water power that was running to waste was a wrong policy. In .the old days, every facility was given to the; miner to get water to his race. In the interests 'of tho mining industry the fullest jiossiblejiberty should bo given for the utilisation of water power to generate electricity. * Mr. Anderson (Mataura) said that while the regulations were not faultless, he did not think: the syndicate on : the Coast had much to complain about. Many of the regulations, he, admitted, were very drastic, and it would be almost impossible to carry them into effect. He,thought the regulations would restrict the use of the water. If. tho Government was .'not going to make use of the water to generate power, it'should give facilities to syndicates and others to use it. x '-■■', The Hon. T. T. Duncan (Oamaru) said ho regarded-the regulations as a safeguard to the bona fide miner. . \ '. .' .Mr. Taylor oh "Company-Mongers." ' • -'Mr..: T. E.'" Taylor (Christchurch North) thought the Government should either develop tho water power itself as a Statu concern, or give fair facilities to other persons, but the Government', should block , mere company-' mongers from handling these' powers. Ho felt pretty sure that those who wanted to get a modification of tho regulations were not miners at, all. Ho thought that what, they wanted to mine was the value of. the concession on the,London'market. Ho hoped; that the Minister for Mines would bo the most stubborn man in New Zealand in regard to these water power rights. • '

," Mr. Massey Moves an Amendment. ■Mr. Massey' moved an amendment to add to the report the following/ words-.—"And in the opinion of this House'the water power conditions issued under the Public Works Amendment Act, .1908, and published- in-the Gazette of June i, 1909, be referred to the Goldnelds^ and;Mines' Committee, to consider and' report to-the House what amendments; should. 00 madeito such conditions." Mr. Massey went on to refer to the regulations issued. '■ '.' ..•Mr: M'Kcnzie: They are not regulations. No regulations havo been issued. ' j; Mr, Massey: Well, I' am'willing 'to'say con-, amons. In fact, I have said conditions 'in my amendment, Ho agreed that tho Government should take stops to prevent' mining concessions being-hawked about London or Paris' or the other centres of the world. The report, however, had-re'fero'nWto-a' special application.'. The district of Riinu could bo' made to pay. as a gold-producing district if waterwas availablo at a reasonable rate. : Tho Mines Department was asking what had .proved to be a prohibitive rate for the water. It would be impossible to make the district pay under the charges proposed by the' Government. It was .mostly local people,' and,not outside speculators,' "',? > v fT®- n ? w .' to tho Government. Mr; Mlwnzic: I deny that in toto. : ■ • "■' _'.Mr.' Massey: ;■ I'. have.got my information from a good source. .Ho could not understand the dog-in-the-mangor N attitude of the Govern-' ment in this matter. Tho late Mr. Scddon had offered a'bonus of .£15,000 and a grant of 200 acres of land to anyone, who would deliver id heads of water at a.moderate height,' iThe reason why there were' periods of depression in New.Zeoland was that.it was part of the Gov- : ernment s- policy to . keep the lands of the Dominion locked up, and apparently it was also part pf : tho Government's policy to keen' the water power locked .up.-„ - • . The Hon.' R.'M'Kenzie said that Mr. Mas- : sey was misinformed'regarding the whole mat-'' ter. ■'■'.. ■-.■■■.

Mr. Massey 'said his information came from some friends of Mr. MKenzie. -- Hon. R. in Reply. ■' Mr. M'Kenzie said the "conditions had' been rs-ierrod.to the Mines Committee who were nowexamining'them. The. Eirau district,' with proper development, would be one'of'the finest gold districts in Now Zealand. .He -was', not preventing the use: of the - water. The applicants in question, were a. subsidiary company' who .had taken up 600 acres■of land in the district, and were holding it in connection withj-the^-application.- The warden 1 had-not dealt-with the applications, neither, had the ground been.surveyed as was required by the Act, and these people were doing nothing themselves;, and were keeping everybody else out He had to amend the Mining Act to prevent any further speculators from ' holding' land without paying anything for it. Ho was as anxious to assist the mining industry' as any member of. the House, but ho was not prepared .to sacrifice one of the most valuable assets which the people of the Dominion had.for anyone. , ■, . '.■y;\ . Personnel of Syndicate. ■This; was a syndica'to which had. placed the proposal on the London market,-where it had' been . for • some .months, to, see if they- could make a-large amoiint. of money out of it with-out-putting-money into it. One of the leaders in the syndicate was the Hon. J. D. Orniond one of the wealthiest men: in the Dominion! and they were'all ready to hawk'the concession' about' and see how much money they could make out of it. When the late Mr.'.Seddon was'iu power the regulations in force provided'for a_ charge pf;,£l per horse,power per annum, : which he. did. not consider was unrea- ! sonablo. The present charge was 3s. per horse power per annum. If this- water power could be developed, and he had no doubt that it .would bo developed before very long, it was much hotter that it should be idle for a few. years than that it should bo given away. This was one of the best investments for capital in New. Zealand; 'Therer was no foundation for the statement that ho had'anything to do with - the-applicants for the concession. Mr. Massey-, Who signcd'the application for it?. • -- -■-~'- -' '" ; -, • Mr. M^Kenzie: There were: two or three applications for'it. I think the Hon. J. D". Ormond signed one. ' -,■'.■'.''.- Mr. Massey: Who signed the others? Mr.-M'Kenzie named a second signatory/. He stated that two of the, original ,applications were afterwards amalgamated and became'one. Who signed the other application he did not know. It would bo a scandalous thing to giveaway these water, powers of the Dominion for nothing. Ho regarded them as far more valuable than the railways, though it might he some years:.before, they ,woro developed. ' The Department was negotiating with people in Australia, and also: with people' in New Zealand, for water,'powers. So far as this particular syndicate was concerned ' ho had recognised from tho first day that it had no intention of developing water power, but' only of hawking about, tho concession to make mbneyiout of it.• Ho did not-seo that there was any hardship hi asking anyone applying for this concession to giyo a deposit of JSM to show their bona fides. The Government wished to give every encouragement to, all who wanted to invest money in mining development,* _ but it asked that -when valuable concessions were, given' the applicants should ,bo placed in alsimilar position to what other people were.'who received like concessions for-the working of saw-' mills'or other industries. The application of this syndicate had been abandoned, and it wanted a return of- its 'deposit of -,;,£SOO. .Ho had to consider-very carefully whether -ho: should return the deposit. (Mr. Carroll:"'A bird in the' hand .") It was questionable! whether the money should be returned, for' in tho case of-'coal~loases whoro'tho conditions had' ; not been complied with deposits bad not .TbaJ^

for the Government to consider. He would I probably, ask the House to pass legislation, to J protect the water powers of tho country from speculators. He had already asked the Mines 'Committee to consider the conditions and make any recommendations they thought .fit." •-.■.■;-.. The Amendment Lost.';.: : : .Mr. Ell (Christelmrch -.South) and Mr. Hogg (Masterton) endorsed tho Minister's attitude, '.-. Mr. Seddon, (Westland) stated that .-ho 1 in- '. tended to support the amendment. If it'were J carried, the Mines Committee, would.'have ' power to go through the regulations. He did ' not object to safeguards being applied in- eon- 1 nection with the industry, but he did object to 1 some of tho regulations, 'There was no ground ? r °S? suggestion of a. monopoly in'-Jegard to ■* the Toaroha proposition. As the ■-, Minister was convinced that the operations oh the West Coast were going to be so successful, why did not the Government . start operations itself there? Tho amendment was negatived by 43 votes to ' 22, and the motion was agreed to. '."'.'.., ■'. . It was decided that tho evidence taken 'in ' connection with the report bo laid on the table of the House and printed. . V ] A Return Refused.'.,'; ;;, In answer to the request of Mr.,Wilford,.for ■ Mr. Guinness, asking for a return in connection . .with, tho applications for licenses ito uso 'water .'j for power purposes, tho Prime Minister has ; stated that as the people-referred to arc not . the only ones applying, and as active, ncgotia- -i tfohs -are - proceeding, with, other applicants nt ', the present time, it is considered detrimental to' the public interests to: comply with the request;