SOUTHLAND POWER POLL

Evening Star, Issue 22440, 10 September 1936, Page 10

SOUTHLAND POWER POLL

HARD-FOUGHT CONTEST “ ONE MAN, ONE VOTE " [Special to the " Star.’l INVERCARGILL, September 10. The referendum now being taken in Southland to decide the fate of its power scheme has aroused all the excitement and hard campaigning ot a parliamentary election. Meetings are being held all over the province, newspapers are full of arguments for and against, and as a topic of popular controversy the rival claims of the Government or an elected local body to control power supply almost overshadows Rugby football discussions and no greater compliment could be paid to the importance of any political question in Southland. . . Ballot papers are going out to ratepayers each day now, and votes must be recorded by noon on September 28. In the meantime some members of.the board are canvassing all the province with outspoken expositions of the board's case, and those who favour Government control are maintaining the activity they have shown for some months. / In the opinion of many observers the referendum has become in many ways more a national political issue than a provincial one. Opponents of the Government’s proposal i take over the scheme are appealing, not without support, to the traditional independence of the province, claiming that the Monowai scheme begun with, and so far paid for, by Southland money should not go over as part of the national network of power supply. They claim that_ the scheme is still an asset to the province, that in a few years it will be paid off and the property of Southland, and that what they term the Government’s •“ eagerness ” to take over the scheme is the best of all possible proofs that the scheme is payable and a potential asset.

On the other hand, those who favour Government control claim that the advantage of the abolition of land rates, and a slight immediate reduction in power charges are a promise of- actual benefits that more than outweigh the future prospects, which they doubt, of the scheme’s prosperity. Both sides are hotly debated. Circulars are being sent out by the board setting out "its case, and with each ballot paper goes a separate statement of the Government’s programme of power supply if it is given control. SINKING FUND, Much of the discussion hinges on the sinking fund charges paid by the board. The board members claim that if the charge were reduced, there would be no necessity for a rate. At present the board needs a rate of £23,000 approximately to balance its budget fyr the year, and some of those levied for the rate are farmers who certainly reside in the Power Board’s area, but who have no power supply at all to their homes. This payment of rates by non-reticulated householders is a bitter point in Southland, and may prove a turning point in the election. UNIQUE FRANCHISE. The referendum is tjaique in one way, because the franchise used in it changes the whole aspect of the voting. The Minister of Finance has decreed' that the referendum will be taken on the principle of “ one man, one vote,” and the property qualification that formerly played a big part in local body elections has no part in the power board poll. The position is causing much discussion, because it is said to be‘the first time in which the Government’s policy of abolishing the “ bricks and mortar ” vote has been, put into operation in a local body election. A man with 30 properties has only the same voting power as the man with only one. The position is not quite clear in the case of firms A manager might have the right to vote for the firm he works for, but if he has a property of his own, he has also his own vote. Whether that is an infringement of the “ one man, one vote,” principle, is causing much earnest discussion. Two circulars one for ratepayers in the City of Invercargill and another for those in country districts, have been sent out by those in favour of the board retaining the scheme. Beth are of several pages, and many arguments are used to briing Southland residents to the view that they should keep the scheme they themselves have started and kept going. One argument used is that, because of its ability to make a profit on the power it buys from the Power Board and sells to the public the Invercargill City Council is enabled to run the trams at a profit and save the ratepayers a big burden. If the control of power went to the Government, ic is claimed, the City Council privileges might not remain, and the city residents would have a bigger rate burden.

Statements made by Mr Nash on the position infer that lie considers it highly desirable in the interests of city residents that the whole electricity business in both city and country should be controlled directly by the Government, since he was struck by the high average retail price paid by city consumers in Invercargill. The change from City Council to Government control in Invercargill was, however, Mr Nash said, not in the present proposal, but might well be considered later. There the matter stands, with nothing definite from either side.

An interesting feature of the city vote follows from the fact that it is given only to property owners. Many non-ratepayers are heavy consumers of electricity, and it is likely that the actual ratepayers will e far more concerned with saying good-bye once ami for all to a Power Board rate than with worrying about a possible reduction in power charges, which may affect their tenants rather than themselves.

There are some 22,000 ratepayers on the rolls in the board’s area. From the intense interest taken in the electioneering it is expected that there will he a big vote, possibly 16,000 or more. It is difficult to forecast any election, but there is a general opinion that the Government will win. Board members claim that the Government might have won some months ago, but' that there has now been a swing towards the Jsoard. Time alone will show.