WHARFAGE ON WOOL

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2574, 23 September 1915, Page 6

WHARFAGE ON WOOL

PROPOSED INCREASE THE QUESTION HELD OVER Considerable discussion took place at last night's meeting of the Wellington Harbour Board over a. recommendation by the Wharves and Accounts Committee to incroase the wharfage oil wool and. hemp by threepence per bale. In bringing forward the recommendation, . tlio chairman (Mr. C. E. Daniell) mentioned that with tho exception of Wanganui the charges at Wellington were less than any other port in New Zealand. Tho. proposed increase would aggregate £3000 per annum., Tlie chairman placed before members a comparative return showing the t wharfage rate oil export wool at all ports. The return was as follows Wellington, 4d. per bale at Railway Wharf and 6d. per bale at other wharves (including labour); Lyttelton, per bale; Bluff, Is. per bale; 1 Dunedin, Is. per bale; Auckland, 6d. per bale; Timaru, Is. per bale; Oamaru,' 6d. per bale; Napier, Is. per bale; Gisborne, Is. per bale; New Plymouth, Gd. per bale or 5 bales of 4cwt. equal to 2s. per ton, or 3 bales over 4ct.,' equal to Ss. per ton; Wangamii, 3d. per. bale; Westport, 6d. per bale; Greymoutli,'6d. per hale; Nelson-,,15. per bale; -Thames, 2s. per ton; Patea, bales not exceeding 4fc\vt. 6d., over but not exceeding scwt. Is., over scwt. but not exceeding 6cwt. 25., over 6cwt. 3s. (including storage); Wairoa, 9d. per.bale; Waitara, 4i-d. per bale dumped, 6d. per bale undumped. Mr. It. Fletcher, M.P., in supporting the proposed increase, contended that the ruling price of. the commodity should bo taken into consideration when fixing tlio charges.' At the present time high prices ruling for wool, and it could well bear the extra'charge. He .would be prepared to see tlie proposal dropped as far as hemp was concerned) Mr. M. Cohen protested against the increase, which ho did not consider warranted.. Tho board had no right to consider the price of the commodity nor anything other than, the cost of handling and the space occupied. Though intended to improve the board's revenue, , the proposed increase might prove a doubleedged sword that would recoil- on the board.

Mr. John Cobbe also objected to the increase, : which he described as unfair and irritating. He moved, as an amendment, that the recommendation be held over and that the board consider how economy could best be effected in the board's operations. This was seconded by Mr. Cohen. , Mr. C. W. Jones pointed out that the increase was proposed because the engineer had reported that the board was dumping at a loss,-consequent upon the increased cost of material. The increase was not. in the nature, of a hit at any particular section of the community. Mr. A. M'Farlane expressed ; the opinion that if the cost of dumping was more than formerly,, then the increased charge should be on dumping. Mr. J. G. Harkness mentioned that the: board's charges had originally been fixed at a low rate so that Wellington might be the final port. . Now when other rports were springing up, the position was that Wellington had to increase the charges instead of beins; able to lower them in competitipn.. That, he contended; showed that the policy in tho past had been wrong. Without 1 agreeing to the present recommendation, he considered that the board should consider the whole question of effecting economy. Mr. j. W. M'Ewan supported the recommendation.

After the chairman had replied, members generally agreed that no harm could be don© by letting the question stand over for a month,- and Mr. Cobbe's amendment,, on being, put.to the meeting, was carried without dissent.