The Hokitika Guardian TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 28th, 1922. TWO HARBOR RATES.

Hokitika Guardian, 28 November 1922, Page 2

The Hokitika Guardian TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 28th, 1922. TWO HARBOR RATES.

Quite an interesting, not to say amusing turn was given to the Greyniouth harbour rating controversy by the issue of tlie leaflet with last . night’s issue drawing attention to the contrasts in view point when the Royal Commission sat on the point at issue, and to-day when some of the principal witnesses are involved in a general election contest. At Mr Steer’s Hokitika meeting, and lately at the same candidate’s Arahura meeting, both Hon. TJ. L. Michel and Mr B. Ward became sudden converts to Mr Steer’s view about the possible or probable ultimate non-collection of the rate from the people of Westland who very much against their will have been drawn into the Greyniouth harbor rating district at the request of Mr Steer, who has landed the area involved ill a rating liability for long years to come. This paper was strongly opposed on principle and simple justice to Westland County, and its interior Boroughs being drawn into the district and mulcted for a liability which it had no voice in contracting. It will be seen from the evidence given at the enquiry by both Messrs Michel and Ward, .that the two gentlemen were at one with tlie viewpoint of this paper. At the time of tlie sittng when the gentlemen gave their evidence, there was not any suggestion of a gepera] election contest in which the

Chairman of the Greyrnouth Harbor Board would be a central figure carrying tlie Reform banner. But in any case, the witnesses were on oath, and tlie Commission bad the benefit of the considered opinions from Messrs Michel and Ward. Both were quite definite in their conclusions about the wrongs and injustices proposed to lie done. Mr Michel was very emphatic from his view and repeated in different forms Lis objection and antipathy to rating being imposed on this district. “I do not think.” Mr Michel said, “Westland district should be included in the rating area” ; and he asked also, with a very preper air of innocence when counsel for the Greyniouth Harbour Board suggested that the Secretary of tlie Board did not think there was an possibility of a rate being imposed. “Why fight for the district to lie included?” Rate or no rate, Mr Michel was definitely opposed to tlie principle of including tlie district in the rating district and he advanced very sound reasons for that attitude. But when Mr Steer palavered here in the same strain, Mr Michel accepted the position sitting down. More, lie encouraged Mr Steer to repeat in more definite terms that in his (Mr Steer’s) opinion, the rate would not ho struck I And Mr Michel, notwithstanding the injustice of the situation acquiesced in a position which was grossly wrong from every point of view. Apparently for the sake of expediency—the matter of assisting Mr Steer’s lame candidature over a difficult stile—Mr Michel agreed to agree with Mr Steer, and allow t’ c penalty to fall on the people as a

whole—anything that Mr Steer’s chances in the contest might not be imperilled. Mr Ward, too, was no less pronounced in his opposition at the Commission. The farmers he said, “are much opposed to inclusion and the rating; they consider it unjust in fact!” Just so; All Westland still thinks so, and Mr Ward put it nil in a nutshell when he wound up by saying: “T think the fact that we are alrendy paying a harbor rate should be reason

for our not paying a second one.” Bravo Mr Ward, but why not stick to your guns? Why permit yourself to be swayed by the Reform candidate and tamely submit to aii injustice which rests upon the whole district for an indefinite number of years to come? Then we have Mr J. I). Lynch facing both ways on this subject. Hero is another candidate—also Reform—hut lie unlike Mr Steer thinks the levying of the rate overshadows the people. “Who was able to say,” asked Mr Lynch at Hokitika the other night when trying to tickle the ears of hiß audience, “the Grey harbor rate would not be collected?” Well, Mr Steer has ' said so, and Mr Micehl and Mr Ward were content to he convinced, hut Mr j Lynch is not and he had something to say about the mismanagement of the | Harbour Hoard of its affairs indicating 1 that all things were possible. But j when the Commission sat at Greymonth Mr Lynch expressed no sympathy or . concern for the plight of Hokitika and surrounding districts being saddled with two harbor rates. When pressed J by Mr Park, examining counsel, on ! the point, his replies were negative and lie declined finally to answer a point ! blank question as to the equity of the i dual rating. So much for Mr Lynch’s sincerity and sympathy in this mat- ' ter. Kvidentlv he can play as fast and loose in these matters as lUr Michel and Mr Ward under stress of circludstances. And so the Reform quartette (we include Air Steer) may be left to nurse their own views and attitude on this injustice to Westland.