HARBOUR CHARGES

Evening Post, Volume CXL, Issue 20, 24 July 1945, Page 6

HARBOUR CHARGES

EVIDENCE FOR BOARD

SMALL PORTS SUBSIDISE!*

Evidence brought by the Wellington Harbour Board in support of its application to the Price Tribunal for permission to increase its dues and charges by 37 per cent, on the ruling 1937 levels was completed this morning, after a sitting of two and a half days. Submissions are being made this afternoon by Mr. A. P. O'Shea, opposing the application on behalf of the New Zealand Farmers' Union, and Mr. J. F. B. Stevenson, the board's solicitor. Captain M. P. Congdon, the board's traffic manager, continuing his evidence this morning, said that the new order which precluded the free transfer of labour in sheds and on the wharves had involved the board in the employment of more men that previously. Further expense had been incurred through the raising of the minimum hours for which the men must be paid. In the course of his evidence, Cap; tain S. S. Holm, president of the New Zealand Shipowners' Federation, complimented the board on the way it conducted the port, but added that if the board's charges rose, that would necessitate an increase in freight rates or a Government subsidy for the shipping companies. Owing to the centralisation of shipping during the war the Government had had to subsidise nine of the smaller ports, said Mr. T. Rait, representing the Treasury Department. The subsidies, however, were not granted so as to maintain the harbour boards concerned in the same financial position as they were before the war, but were merely to make up losses directly due to the centralisation of overseas shipping. ■■■'," Mr. Rait presented a schedule showing that since 1943 £79,044 altogether had been-paid to the following harbour boards as subsidy:—Timaru, Gisborne, Wairoa, Oamaru, Napier, New Plymouth, Bay of Islands, and Wanganu'i. EXPECTED TO TAKE IT. To Mr. O'Shea, Mr. Rait said that the policy as he understood it was not to subsidise boards just because their revenue had dropped to a bad relative position. If the . boards were strong enough to "take a knock," they were expected to take it. , Questioned by Mr. H. L. Wise, a member of the Tribunal, Mr. Rait said the Government did not expect the assisted boards to call upon all their reserves before a subsidy was paid. The Government realised that certain sums would have to be ayailable for spending as soon as conditions were normal. Praise for the Wellington Harbour Board, which he said was probably the most efficient in New Zealand as far as the Marine Department was concerned, was expressed by Mr. W. C. Smith, representing that Department. He told of the high standards required by the. Department for the safety of life and property on the wharves, and said the Wellington board had done well in this respect. He thought this port.was unlikely to maintain wartime tonnage in post-war years. Some of the overseas tonnage would go to smaller ports after the war. To Mr. O'Shea, Mr. Smith said the British Ministry of Shipping would be likely to call for a quick turn-round of ships for two years after the war. WAGES .OF WATERSIDERS. Before the Tribunal adjourned Captain R. E. Price, chairman of the Waterfront Control Commission, said that the board's costs had increased as a result of what the commission had done in raising waterside workers' wages, and he knew that the board had received no compensation for that. There had been a misunderstanding in the first place that the commission was supporting the board's application. He remarked that the board's rates were lower .than those applying in London. Asked by the chairman of the Tribunal, Mr. Justice Hunter, whether the recent increase in waterside workers' wages had been approved by the Stabilisation Commission, Captain Price said he did not think they should discuss that, as the matter had been taken to the Court of Appeal.

His Honour said the question of the legality of the increase was one for that Court, but the question whether the proposal to increase wages had gone before the Stabilisation Commission might well be considered by the Tribunal..

Captain Price said the Waterfront Control Commission, along with certain other specified organisations, had the same authority to act as if the Stabilisation Commission had approved, provided they took cognisance of the stabilisation policy, and they had merely used that power.