ONSLOW WATER SCHEME

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2405, 10 March 1915, Page 8

ONSLOW WATER SCHEME

| ■ f.To the Editor.] '< Sir, —In Mr. Kirkcaldie's letter in I. , your issue of this morning we have a very Rood sample of the arguments of !,., the'supporters.; of what he calls "our tlatest water scheme,' 'or porhaps it ;- ■ would be more correct to say "their -, latest no-w'ater scheme," as it is vory ■■ '•doubtful as to whether there is, or ever' will be, sufficient water in thei stream, ,s - or,-for that, matter;; oil ;the dry hills of the catchment area, to entitle it to the > namo of a water scheme. Mr Kirkcaldie states that after liavt ina«fo]lowed / up..Mr. Crump's argu- !. .. monts._ and checked his figures, ho : is convinced that the scheme, is sound. $lon, Sir, your correspondent; is asking 1 the ratepayers of Onslow to rake for b;'r . : granted .the fact that -Mr. Crump's figures, are correct, and that his. scheme is sound simply,because he (Mr. Kirk[r caldie) has; checked his figures 'pud ■' > swallowed his": arguments. This is 5 -.surelv a big order for the ratepayers j and m almost the same breath Mr. ; . Kirkcaldie. gets away from tho water ; icheme. and. comniences ( to ? ; scuss a lot-of irrelevant matter that -bag no j bearing whatever on that question. In tho next paragraph Mr.' Kirk'f" V-c a ldie begs . the .ratepayers to. .sanction ; i this proposal on the verbal balf-pro- ( ' mise of the Mayor that he (the Mayor) will not attempt to raise the money for, , v.; say; three years, although they .would have full power to do sol- Jn refer- , cnco to the statement, that "Rate- !■ jsayer" is wrong in the capacity of tho :reservoir, and the isize _of the , catchF mont area. all I have to say is that in all probability he is in the same unforjr i.-' tuuato.. as most of . his fcllow- • "ratepayers in not having been told by 1 tho promoters of the project what tho [U yischemo really, embodies. . Surely when tho authors of a. scheme are afraid to bring the details of their schemc to the . light of day there is something about . : ; it,.that will not stand investigation. ; . Nobody seems to'know anything about . tho 'scheme, including, the . ratepayers 1 who;have to find the money to gratify the extravagant tastes of several peo- )■. pie who want to sell out and leave the , district, and also leave the other poor j fellow to bear the burden. • I may say that I do, not, refer, to Mr. Kirkcaldie as'ono of these. With regard to the i ',- authority that Mr. Kirkcalcuo refers to on "water power," I may point out : ' that from an pomt of view there .may be a. vast,difference between - ''water power" and "water supply." Tlio former in all probability uses the . water and passes it on, while tho lat- !" ter, consumes it, and leaves the chap i : . lower down the stream without, usually : at the expense of tho consumer. According to Mr. Crump' figures (and I tako it that Mr. Kirkcaldie has j>ut the ' matter fairly, having checked them), it h - would be possible .to build a reservoir in-a; dry gully, and get an abundance ; of,water. Has such an absurdity been i - heard of? Anyone_ would think, to listen-to these ingenious people, that r: there was no such thing as soakage or • evaporation. . ' •. In the next two paragraphs your cor- ?: respondent again; attenipts to discuss j a lot-of irrelevant matter, to which no reply is neoessary., ' iln reference to. road-grading, Sir. Kirkcaldie and ljis friends will, disp '.cover that: this-item; is no scarecrow i ' when.it has to bo paid'for, and if anyj;M .thing, "Ratepayer" under-estimated the -'..cost. He then- makes; a: rambling Kijs't'aiement about legal opinions relative f,"i;".<toT" compensation, but fike the other [.'.''.^supporters'.of> the scheme he religiously nrks discussion of this important asfect of the cae.. ■ _ • _ Now, Sir, Mr. Kirkcaldie . evidently tended -his letter to be a reply to that k yfr "Ratepayer," but it has fallen' la/p'mentably short, as he has not. replied (■/ to; nor substantially denied, one of the fc many.. solid arguments put forward by \-- J . ''Ratepayer.'.'—l am, etc., PRO BONO PUBLICO. ; •'. • March 8, 1015. '

i ' Sir, —Tho letter of Mr. Kirkcaldie in ; ■ yonr issue of March 8 ends with the fe.?"-,query,' "What do you' think?" May I &■ - : be. allowed to! reply to Mr. Kirkcaldie, . : "Very little of tho prospects' of your i- ,-ii 'water scheme' unless you can produce ■V-., something .better than, tho arguments appearing above jour name." If these are-the only arguments the supporters of the scheme can bring forward, the : .sooner they retire and save themselves , and the council from their third defeat r:' : .\i the;.:bettef it will be. Let me, sir, 1 al-

though such'statements are totally irrelevant to the issue, state that though tl may h&vo been here 20 years, as Mr. Eirkcaldie says; I no more bought "a fiacre block for £100 then, or since, than I Bhaired with Mr. Eirkcaldie in buying m 13.78 land on Lambton Quay which is now worth ten' times the price. But •.these and other "red herrings", drawn : across ,the scent by Mr. Kirkcaldie arid' •■Jiis'Jfriends merely prove .they cannot ;face the points raised by the-opponents ■of their,scheme. These points are, mainly (1) That the figures based upon the average rainfall oyer, the conservation area) aind supplying the needs of th« district-are fallacious, as the minimum rainfall based upon 'ascertained figures over many years can alono Tclied \upon, and this has not, been given us.. (2) That the l stream flowing through the area; 1 has been drying up for years, and' is now a mere trickle; and therefore cannot be relied upon as a. factor in the .water supply. (3) That if it were otherwise arid there was a plentiful supply ■of water 'from the stream'the owners of Hie riparian rights further doivn the stream, who- have erected dams and works-dependent'at all events to some 'extent upon the stream, would by law 'shave the', first -right to so muchv water W would practically nullify the stream ' i=o-far as we are concerned, or,' failing

Jthai, to 1 so much by-way of compensation' as would cripple the ; i scheme. (4) .That; 1 a sanitation scheme '«t a cost of at least £40,000 (and pos- • < siblymore) must necessarily follow the water scheme. (5) That, notwithstanding all denials of JJr. Kirkcaldie and his to the contrary, a road-grad-•jng • and formation schemo to cost ,at £35,000 is. an integral part of both schemes, and must accompany them. (6) That in addition to all this each will have to find his share ■of separate installation of water and of from £35 to £40, besides -■£3 for the water meter. In' conclusion,, sir, let me. ask Mr. ''Kirkcaldie, who raises the only point %orth noting in the words, "It is either 'shall wo havo a water supply' or 'shall .we' remain a3: wo arc,' " why the raw..payers are to be. compelled '\villy-nilJy Ho accept the'present scheme? Surely ■tcfore sanctioning what eventually must ■run into closo -on £100j000 of espendx- , turo ratepayers would do well_ to beware of-trusting this huge sum into the Jiands of those who have already led "us into-paying £7000' for a'few acres of bare goat-hills, which they are now planting with prims' insigms to increase the water'supply." Let us have rthe best'expert opinion first upon the "best, cheapest, and most effective water,, sanitation,- and- road-grading scheme. . -Let us approach the owners of riparian rightsj- and-ascertain 'upon wbat terms ■ thoy are, prepared to meet us m the matter. But the supporters of the water ' scheme burk all discussion and decide all criticism! At two of their meetings ■ called."to discuss tho water scheme aU opposition was gagged, bv the Mayor s ruling. As in the Hutt Road case, wo are asked to sign a blank' cheque, and then to "open our mouths and close our .;■ eyes and see what they've got for a glad l surprise." We will get tlm "surprise all right if wo sanction this oxpondituro, " but the merriment will be speedily checked' by the next rate demand.—l am, etc., , RATEPAYER.

Sir,—Mr. Rirkcaldie says that he has checked the figures of the Mayor (Mr. Crump) and that he in satisfied the

scheme is sound. Messrs. Crump and Kirkcaldie may be very capable men in their own particular spheres, but they cannot'claim to he experts either as regards civil engineering or water supply schemes; Mr. Kirkcaldie talks a lot about the water falling on the catchm'ent.area, and its adequacy for a water supply for many - years. For irnny months . the stream (the basis of the scheme) that flows out of the catchment area, and, which, he passes every ;day, has. become almost completely dry.' Surely ocular demonstration in' regard to ;such a matter is more valuable -than all theorising? The, stream is at piesent- almost a negligible quantity so far as drainage and water are concerned, as .any ratepayer can see who ..takes the trouble to look at it. If those of the Ngaio people who are .supporting the scheme will take a stroll up to Khandallah and sea the stream, I feel confident that they will cease to advocate the work. Mr. Kirkcaldie says that three-quarters of the money" will probably he required for reticulation, and that if we later on join the City we shall require the reticulation all' the same. Has it occurred to him that, for various reasons, including the smallness of;the calibre of many of the pipes, the scheme of reticulation proposed may not suit, should we join the City later'on? Mr. Kirkcaldie lightly touches on the question of the regrading of the roads and infers that such.will, not t'e necessary. I understand that 'here aro about'' 17 miles of pipes that w>ll havo to be laid, and as water and drainage must be dealt with together, o.herwise .the surplus water cannot be got rid of, it will surely be necessary to icgrade the numerous switchbacks all over,the district before even the water pipes are laid, as if it is not done th«n it will have to be done when the gravitation drainage system is laid down, and, failing the matter haying attention when the water pipes.are laid, we thouid either have to\ subsequently lift , the water pipes when the drainage system is installed, or be faced with tl>e extraordinary anomaly of having the two sets of pipes at different levels. Let me here remind ratepayers, that when the meeting was 'held at Khandallah; in December last councillors quite' a feature of the' fact that water and drainage would either have to be coin; cident or follow one another.

/And now for a few words ns regards the corponsation question. It_ is /simply nonsense for Mr. Kirkcaldie to allege that t"he whole burden of the solicitor's opinion, quoted in the pamphlet to which he refers,'was that "the council should be careful." The solicitor said that it would be very unwise 1 for the Onslow Borough to proceed with the proposed work without the fullest consideration, and without first ascertaining from the lower riparian proprietors mentioned what claims are 'ikely to be made. He added that' •he felt sure that if the local body proceeded with the work without the fullest previous consideration it would find itself in the most serious difficulties hereafter. Surely this is emphatic enough. ( Finally, let me ask Mr. Kirkcaldie a few questions. (1) Will not the combined water and drainage schemes cost at least £60,000? Can one be adopted without the other? At 51 per cent., plus ,1 per cent towards jinking . fund,! the very lowest rates at' which.' the 'money, could be raised: at the present time, even, if available, will not; these amount: 'to £3750 per annum in extra rates 'on Khandallah and Ngaio? If the're-grad-ing of the- streets.is added, will not' this amount to at least £20,000 additional, thus making the total additional' rates £5000 per annum figures do not include any provision for compensation for riparian' rights, which can crily be settled by a Compensation Court, but which may .run into several tens of thousand's, and which the Mayor' ;is leaving. out of his calculations; (2) Is not piping mucn'dearer than it was before the war (some say at lea6t 50 per cent.) ? Will not any estimate,- there : fore, have to be recast and much higher provision made? (3) Should-not the consideration of such expensive works, for which there is no -urgency, be postponed: at all events until the war is over, especially in view, of the facts teat material and money are at present, so ( much dearer, that a war tax is 11 evitable, and that'bread and foodstuffs and. living generally are so much higher in Mr. Kirkcaldie will kindly give direct answers to these .siniple questions.—l am etc., NB STJTOR ULTRA CRBPIDAM. Khandallah," March 9, 1015.