HUTT-PETONE GAS QUESTION

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 121, 15 February 1921, Page 8

HUTT-PETONE GAS QUESTION

A PROSPECT OF SETTLEMENT. As a result of the Lower Hutt Borough Council’s decision last evening to meet the Petone Council and discuss the possibility of entering into a new gas agreement, there is a prospect of finality being reached on a question which has for a considerable time been a bone of contention between the boroughs. At last night’s meeting of the Hutt Council advice was received from the town clerk, Petone, that his ’ council did not agree to confer with the Hutt Council on the question of entering into a new gag agreement to take effect from the termination of the existing one, but that it was prepared to confer for the purpose of entering into a new agreement to date from March 31, 1921. The Mayor (Mr. E. P. Rishworth) said that councillors were aware of the position. The klecidedly liberal proposal which the Hutt had offered. Petone had been turned down. Councillor A. J. Hobbs moved that a reply 'be sent the Petone Council stating that they were prepared to meet Petone representatives to discuss a new agreement to date from April 1, 1921. Councillor W. T. Cottom seconded the motion.

Councillor A. Macaskill said he would oppose the motion on tho ground that it was not the thing to try to enter into a new agreement when the existing one had not yet expired, in. fact it had two years to run. Councillor A, Mitchell said that according to Sir Robert Stout’s ruling the Petone councillors would be personally responsible if they made any variation in the agreement. The Mayor explained that the Petone Council could give away nothing of its rights without getting a quid, pro quo. Councillor A. J. West said that no harm would emanate from the conference —he would support tho motion as a last resort. Councillor E. J. Guineas was of opinion that the resolution wa s ineffective. According to the resolution passed by the Petone Council, the onus of submitting proposals for a new agreement was on the Hutt. “If we are to send a committee to meet them we must have some proposals to submit,” he added. Councillor Hobbs, in reply) said that bis- principal reason for making tne proposal was that the council was in receipt of expert advice as to the erection of its own gas works. The chances were that the ratepayers would turn down the proposal of the c ? uncll ° erect such works. ‘ conference,” said Councillor Hobbs, wo will have a stronger case when we place our proposal before the ratepayers The motion was carried on the casting vote of the Mayor. The voting was as follows: For. Councillors Hoblis, West Cotton, Meldrum, and the Mayor. AfAinst: Councillors Hardy, Macaskill, Mitchell. dnincFS. find TTnipflit. , it was further decided that a special meeting of the council be held on Thursday next for the purpose of considering the proposals to be submitted at the conference.