The Hokitika Guardian THURSDAY, DEC. 14th, 1922. BROKEN PROMISES.

Hokitika Guardian, 14 December 1922, Page 2

The Hokitika Guardian THURSDAY, DEC. 14th, 1922. BROKEN PROMISES.

A peculiar position was revealed at the County Council meeting on Tuesday by the letter read from the Prime Minister's office indicating (1) that tho Government was not disposed to give local Imdies any share of the timber royalty revenuo obtained from State Forests and (2) that the Government did not intend to appoint the Commission to go into the question of past timber royalties claimed by the local bodies. This is a flagrant breach of promise to a dual degree. In regard to the first, issue, there was the promise by Sir Francis Bell and Mr Massey, to say nothing to that of Captain Ellis of the Forestry Department, that the local bodies would receive a share of the revenue. This is now refused point blank, and not only are definite promises broken but the local bodies aTe going to loso revenue which equitably belongs to them. The Government by reason of being the predominant parfnor is going to exercise its omnipotf'lß’f: pod dmply filch the

money from the local bodies. The whole transaction, we say plainly, is immoral There is nothing equitable in the attitude of the Government. Trading on its powers of possession it is going to take from the people of the W’est Coast in general and the people of Westland in particular, what is undoubtedly their birthright, the legitimate revenue accruing from the natural resources of the district. Sir F. D. Bell when hero some three years or more ago, said that while be could not bind the Government. bis own opinion was that tile revenue from the State forests should he adjusted as between the Department and the local body. The local bodies represented at the conference. when the remark was made, accepted it in good faith, for they knew Sir Francis Bell’s standing with the Government, and the absolute control he exercised, in shaping the forests policy and legislation. Again. Mr Massey as Prime Minister when approached on the question, made a statement akin to that of his colleague, and later Captain Ellis came down and sounded the local body as to a percentage quota of the revenue. There are hundreds of thousands of acres of timber country in Westland which in the ordinary course .would go on indefinitely yielding local revenue, and enable the local body to keep down its rates. Every ratepayer is thus directly concerned in this matter, and the people should back up the local body ill the demand for what Mr Massey would call “a square deal.” But the letter which emanates from Mr Massey’s office does not indicate any disposition to lie at all equitable in the dealings with the local bodies over the matter. Then with regard tq the second phase, declining to set up a commission to determine what is rightly due to the local bodies on past revenue. This lias boon authorised by law. yet a letter conies from the Prime Minister's office refusing to obey the law! Mr Massey while being a law-maker, is also a lawbreaker when *t suits him. but it is not the first time he has refused to carry out as in this case, his own made laws. Tt is a shocking example for others to imitate, and when we hear Mr Massey railing at those who will not respect the law, let him be reminded that he is one of the chief offenders in that unconstitutional (nurse himself. In regard to the back revenue. the local bodies won out from the Government on the legal technicalities as to the moneys due. The Government partially admitted this by making certain payments. But the Government will not agree to tile point being cleared up to the satisfaction of the local bodies by setting up the Commission to arrive at a proper adjustment of the matter. The Government has said in the past, here is an amount, take it or leave it! There is not justice in that line of action. If the Government has the machinery to arrive at a sum, it surely would not bo costly to prove to a Commission that the amount was correct. And if not correct, then we must assume that the Government is deliberately filching from the local bodies, taking from the ratepayers, money which should go to the local body account. There is a stigma attached to the Government by tile attitude it. is taking up which is a reflection on their fairness and which is certainly not creditable to their public reputation. The Government owes it to itself, no less than to the local bodies to clear this matter up, and to demonstrate that they are not indulging in sharp practice, or taking advantage of the local bodies behind their hacks. As a conference is to bo held on the matter, we are sure wo have not heard the last of the question, and doubtless steps will he taken to force the Government to follow a, fairer course, and one which will not leave them as a Government, under a cloud.