HARBOUR BOARD MANAGEMENT.

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2445, 26 April 1915, Page 3

HARBOUR BOARD MANAGEMENT.

Sir, —My attention has just been drawn to a paragraph appearing in one of the Wellington papers en Thursday, April 22, regarding a question, raised at the meeting dl' the Harbour Board on tlie night- previous. In reply to a question by Mr. M'Farlane with regard to my statement re tho value of reclaimed land, the chairman said that the statement (i.e., mine) was quite erroneous; instead of £400, the return was £4800 altogether. In my statement I only took the reclamation of Waterloo Quay and To Aro, the return from these being £404, as stated. The figures quoted by Mr. Fletcher included the whole of the rents received by the Harbour Board, nearly half of which comes from the Grainger Street block. In justice to myself, therefore, I trust you will give me an opportunity of placing before the electors a few additional figures with regard to these two reclamations. In 1909 Waterloo Quay appeared on. the balance-sheet as an asset to the extent of £69,776, the rent received by the board being £200. In 1914 tho value of this asset had risen to £175,883, or an increase of £106,107, equal to 152 per cent. The rent lor 1914 was £313, an increase of £113 for 1909, equal to 56.5 per cent. Regarding the Te Aro reclamation, an item appears in the balance-sheets as "Cable Street section, Te Aro reclar mation endowment." It is not clear from the particulars provided in the balance-sheet as to whether this is a portion of the Te Aro reclamation appearing 'in the assets, but to give the board the benefit of the doubt, I have taken out the following figures:— In 1909 the value of this reclamation stood as an asset to the extent of £50,272, the rent received being £1611. In 1914 the balance-sheet shows that tho value of this reclamation had risen to £118,296, or an increase either of capital expenditure or of writing up the asset equal to £68,024, or 135 per cent., while the rental received during 1914 was £841, or a decrease of £770 over 1909, equal to 48 per cent. I think tlie public will recognise that it is information such as this which should be available, and proves contentions mentioned previously in your columns that there is large amount of capital sunk in land which is unproductive', and which could be turned to producing revenue if the conditions of lease -were more elastic. —I am, etc., H. G. HILL. April 23.