HUTT MILK, WATER AND SEWERAGE

Dominion, Volume 37, Issue 203, 25 May 1944, Page 7

HUTT MILK, WATER AND SEWERAGE

Labour Candidate’s Reply

Replying to Citizens’ candidates’ statements on the milk issue in Lower Hutt. Mr. P. Dowse. Labour candidate for the mayoralty, quoted these clauses from the report of the Milk Commission: “(a) The milk delivered to consumers m the Hutt Valley is not of the same standard as the milk delivered by the Wellington City Council or the raw milk purchased bv the Wellington City Council before pasteurizing. Delivery methods are wasteful. Eighteen vendors travel -bl miles to deliver 1830 gallons of mil*. -1 his is 6.5 gallons to the mile. Considerable saving roust have been matte from zoning, but this has not been passed on to the consumer. Before zoning was introduced some milk was bottled, but now it is all delivered .loose. The Health Department have recommended that the Hutt 'alley milk supply be pasteurized. (bl ner cent, of Hut.t Valley milk samples handled bv the Health Department failed to comply. . . . All samples of Wellington City Council milk complied. Did the Citizens’ candidates deny this, he asked. Zs , .. Concerning water. Mr. Dowse sad reticulation and the building of reseiwits could.have been done during rhe d e pressftn at half present costs. IGovernment Town Planner. Mr. J. M . Mtrw son, reported in 1940 that Petone had 10 days’ storage; Lower Hutt el tours, and that “common prudence demands that there should be at least seven days supply for fire-fighting and normal industrial purposes.” Now. said Mr. Dowse there was little more than two hours storage. Complaints about sewage backing upon properties were in some cases of 1< Y ea rs standing. As for be tho manpower shortage, could this De blamed for the state of the block hounded by Elizabeth and York stree Jf. an^?“ d k " wick Road, neglected since settlement took place there 20 years ago?

MR. ANDREWS’ REPLY Labour Report Held As Misrepresentation Tn all his public career he had never ssspxirwfls ent’s statements on the milk issue and lhe report of the Milk <*«<>“•, Clause (a) was. not part of the find ings of the commission, said Air. Andrews, but was an extract from . the minority report signed by one onlv Mr. G. W. Dell, who was the Labour Party’s member on the commission, a d was an attempt to mislead the publie? Clause (b) was an even worse case. It was removed completely from its con text on page 106, and set Mr. Dell’s minority report. It was set out with the line Preceding it and the two lines following it deleted. lhe effect created was an impression that Hutt Valley milk was not good by comparison, whereas the three lines deleted, and this was an unpardonable attempt to create a false, impression, stowed Hutt Valley supplies as second best out of the five major districts in New ZealaMr. Andrews said he felt sure the public would be grieved to think that such tactics should be resorted to. Another candidate had denied that Labour candidates had made any reference to unr dulant fever, but he had. the- assurance that a scare article published on page 8 of the Hut Valley News’ on May .3 was supplied by the Labour Party, said Mr. Andrews.