The Evening Star FRIDAY, JUNE 22, 1934. HARBOUR BOARD CONSTITUTION.

Evening Star, Issue 21753, 22 June 1934, Page 8

The Evening Star FRIDAY, JUNE 22, 1934. HARBOUR BOARD CONSTITUTION.

A somewhat unusual discussion arose at last night’s meeting of the Otago Harbour Board. It sprang from an inquiry from the Lyttelton Harbour Board as to the Otago Board’s opinion of its own constitution. The draft reply of the chairman and secretary was to the effect that admittedly on the basis of population and rateable values the allocation of membership was inequitable, but that the movement for readjustment should come from the public, and not the board. Ultimately members agreed to this reply being sent, with an addition that it would be opportune for the Harbour Boards’ Association to move in the direction of having all harbour boards constituted on the same basis. The reason why this is not so at present is that, in addition to a general Harbours Act, there is a special Act for each board, subordinate to the general Act. This latter is elastic in its provisions as to what constitution each special Act may specify, and needless to say the Otago Harbour Board special Act does not transgress the provisions of the general Act. In the early years of settlement of this province the harbour was controlled by the Provincial Council, but sixty years ago a Harbour Board was constituted. The principle of having special representation for shipowners and payers of dues on goods—i.e., importers—is a long-established one, as is also the practice of having one Government nominee on the board. This accounts for the presence of four members out of the fourteen comprised on the board, and in the election of tho other ten both city and country electors participate, but not as in one ward. Apparently last night’s discussion originated from dissatisfaction in the country as to the city’s preponderating representation. Dunedin and St. Kilda, as one ward, elect five members; Port Chalmers, two; West Harbour, one; and the rest of Otago (excluding part of Central Otago), divided into two wards, two members. It is quite evident that, with city and suburban interests returning fourfold as many ratepayers’ members as do the country interests, the basis of population and rateable values is very widely departed from. Mr Thompson, who has been a notably active country member. supplied figures which are convincing enough on that head, and he quoted the constitution of the Lyttelton Harbour Board, with its two to' one representation of country versus town representatives, as more equitable than that of tho Otago Board; nor did he disapprove of nonrepresentation of shipowning interests on the northern body. It is no secret that sectional interests have long been a disturbing, influence in the functioning of the Otago Harbour Board to the best advantage. This is perhaps natural, seeing that under the one authority virtually two ports are administered. In the past a considerable portion of the board’s funds has gone to Upper Harbour improvements, and, as there has been virtually no increase in the patronage of the Port of Otago, what has been Dunedin’s gain in traffic has been Port Chalmers’s loss. Against this steady declension in the activities of Port Chalmers its special representatives have doggedly fought, and have sought to show, sometimes on reasonable grounds, that the transition has not worked out for the good of the Port of Otago as a whole. It can safely be said that so long as the constitution of the board remains as at present that attitude will never be relaxed, for it is regarded by the Port Chalmers electorate as a fight for existence. Though it is commendable of Mr Begg to say that the sooner members gob it into their heads that all should act as members of the board and not as representing one sport or the other the better they would get on, yet experience shows that this counsel of perfection is unattainable. This appears to be the view of the chairman, an ex-chairman, and one other member at least; for from them came the view that placing the affairs of the board in commission would be in the best interests of the port and the province. This may be taken as an admission from within that under existing condi-

tious tlio task of administration is a thankless one. It may also be an admission of more than that, but on that aspect we do not propose to enlarge at present. It is pleasing, however, to note that the board’s revenue for the first eight months of its current year (to May 31) was up nearly £7,000 compared with that for the first eight mouths of the previous year. If that upward trend is continued it may postpone for a time the consideration of the need to institute a rating area and impose a harbour rate, concerning which some members have periodically dropped hints. Perhaps the possibility of such a step was behind Mr Thompson’s advocacy of stronger numerical country representation on the board.