TIMBER ROYALTIES AND LOCAL BODY REVENUE

Hokitika Guardian, 9 May 1928, Page 1

TIMBER ROYALTIES AND LOCAL BODY REVENUE

Regarding the question of limber royalties and the allocation of a. share of the revenue to local bodies, the matter has been brought prominently to the front by reason of the late interviews with the Hon. 0. Hawkeu, A 1 blister of the Forest Service, when recently here. It will lie recalled that on that occasion. Air Seddon, ALB., introduced n deputation from the Westland County Council, and Air Murdoch, County Chairman, spoke at length on the question. Since then Mr Seddon has been asked to .submit the case for the local bodies in writing, and both tlie Grey and Westland County Councils have -done so through the member for AVestland.

The following is the case lor the Westland County Council, particulars of which were submitted to the Council meeting yesterday:—

TIMBER ROYALTIES IN WESTLAND ■Sir, —In reply to your memo of the 23rd ultimo, requesting me to furnish a. written statement succinctly setting out in separate paragraphs the deputation’s proposals, I have, to state that these relate to our (4) separate issues, as follows:

1. Unclaimed royalties from 1900 to to 1913. 2. Halves of territorial revenue. 3. Goldfields revenue.

4. 'Royalties for Limber cut by the State Forest Service.

Consistent with clearness, I will deal with each of these headings seriatim from the County’s point of view. _

ROYALTIES FROM 1900 TO 1913. From and after the passing of Section 10 of the Alining Amendment Act 1900, all royalties derived from timber cutting rights granted over Midland Railway Alining Reserves became goldfields revenue, and as such were payable to the local body; and after the passing of Section 2ot The limber and Flax Royalties Act, 1905,” onehalf the royalties derived from timber cutting rights and payable into the Consolidated Fund were also payable to the local authority. From the year 1900 to the year 1905 the Westland County Council received no timber royalties whatever from the Alining Reserves, and from 1905 to 191.3 onh one-lialf instead of the whole. In 19L3 the County took the matter up with the Government and the Countys claim was recognised by the payment of £ll6O 10s in October, 1914, and later on by two payments of £4-10 and £495, in 1915 and 1922 respectively. it has never been clearly understood wliy these royalties were not allocated to the County in accordance with the provisions of the law. There is no evidence that the aggregate amount paid was all that the County was entitled to, and in order that the whole matter maybe finally cleaned up, the County considers that the question should be referred to a Judge of the Supreme Court for ail independent investigation and final settlement of the County’s claims. HALVES OF TERRITORIAL REVENUE.

The County still derive one half of the royalties accruing from timber cutting rights granted by the A\ arden, both from sawmill sites and reservations, but since the 31st of March. 1924, the County is entitled to only one-fifth of the royalties from new timber cutting l ights granted by the State Forest Service. The County regards this as a confiscation of its rights, and considers that it should receive either the halves as heretofore, or at least two-fifths instead of one-fifth. See Section 17 (21 of the Finance Act. 1924. GOLDFIELDS REVENUE. As already stated, the County has been entitled to the whole of the royalties derived from timber cutting ligliti

on Alining Reserves since ’the year 390!). Since tho passing ol Section 17 (2) of “The Finance Act, 1924.” the County instead of receiving the whole of the revenue as provided in the Alining Amendment Act 1900, is now entitled to only one-fifth in respect of all new licenses granted by tho: State Forest Service over Alining Reserves. This is a very severe blow to the County, not only because of the drop from the whole to one-fifth, hut because the new provisions will operate over the greater portion of the area of the Alining Reserves. The old licenses in respect of which tlie County receives now 90 per cent of the royalties, covers only a small proportion of the whole. The C'oimty regards this legislation also as a confiscation of its rights, and respectfully submits after carolul consideration, that whereas in the past the County has derived twice the royalty from the Alining Reserves that it derives from other timber cutting rights, tlie same proportionate allocation should lie observed in respect to all licenses issued since 1924’ by the State Forest Service.

ROYALTY' ON 'LUM BER CUT BY Till STATE FOREST SERVICE.

Section 17 (2) of “ The Finance Act 1924 ” provides for the payment to tlie local authority of a proportion of royalty on new timber cutting licenses issued by the State Forest Service. The Westland County would like to know how much timber from Crown Lunds in the County was sold by the State Forest Service from the date of tlie passing of tlie Forests Act 1921-22 up to tlie 131st of Alarcli, 15)24, and if there is any reason whv royalty should not lie paid to tlie County in respect of such sales.

Adverting to tlie interview in Keller’s Hotel granted by you to a deputation from the AVestland County Council, i brought under your notice a table showing timber revenue received by the Westland County Council for tlie years 1926 and 1927. On reading the table produced, you expressed .surprise at tlie falling off shown by these figures, and I understood you were to ask th - Forest Service for an explanation. In order that tlie matter may he dealt with, 1 append hereto a memorandum signed by Mr D. J. Evans (County Clerk) on this subject also.

1 have the honour to he. Your obedient servant, J. A. .MURDOCH, County Chairman. RE TIAIRER ROYALTIES. A J.EAIOR ANDUAf. FOR COUNTY CHAIRAIAN. The following are die figures asked for bv veil:- — TIMBER REVENUE FOIL 1926. £ s. d: Fifths, .Forests Service ... 638 4 S? Halves, Land Office 2919 11 <3 Royalties, Goldfields Revenue 945 7 3 £4233 3 S TTAfBER REVENUE FOlt 1927. Fifths, Forests Service ... 593 10 2 Halves, Land Office 303 11 2 Royalties, Goldfields Revenue T 513 12 10

£2410 14 2 There appears to be a considerable discrepancy in these figures. It will be seen that the fifths remain about an average. Tlie halves show a notable drop, and it might he expected tlie fifths would increase, but they declined actually. If halves produced £2,949 in 1926. fifths would have given £llBO on the average for next year, but this amount does not appear and I fear is. lost to the Council. The royalties from Goldfields Revenue also call for comment. Here, I fear again, revenue has been lost through the Council not being credited in 1926 With its full receipts from royalties on Midland Area mining reservations.

This is back to the old grievance the Council had, and 1 am satisfied an investigation of the matter would recoup to tho Council a large suiii of money at present withheld through a false interpretation of the law, or the neglect of some official to credit tlie amounts in the way intended by tlie Statute. The drop from £4,233 in 15)26 to £2410 in 15)27 could be accounted for only by some such explanation of misunderstanding or oversight. j am of the opinion tlie matter is so important Unit in any investigation tile local bodies concerned should have direct representation. There should ho notiiing to hide in this matter, and the local bodies'should certainly have their rights legally anti equitably. "It has always been the promise of Alitiislor.s that a wrong would not lie done the local bodies, and that promise should be respected by the authorities now granting an independent investigation of tlie matter, both legally and from a book-keeping or audit point of view, to see that tlie Council lias received tlie revenue it is entitled to. D. J. EVANS, County Clerk.

DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL. When the above report was read and received by the Council at yesterday’s meeting. Air AYard said in (oimcvt'on with the timber royalties Hint the Chairman had done an extraordinary amount of work on beha!i of the Council. He had read the report of the Chairman who had lmd tlm knowledge and tlie ability to their request. He hoped the report would hear fruit. The attitude of tlie Council was that tlie money was due to it and in pressing their claims the Chairman deserved their very best thanks. A large sum of money was involved, and he thought the application by tlie Chairmen for the appointment of a, Supreme Court judge to examine and muke a final adjustment was a. very ( ,m>. Air Alurdodi undoubtedly deserved their very best thanks lor his able advocacy.

Ah Wells endorsed. The report was a very full one and the request of the Chairman for an enquiry liy a Supreme Court judge was a very fair on- Tho matter was of great importance to tlie Council and there was a large sum of money involved. The subjci t was one that had been a burning question with the Council over a long period of years and had it not boon that the Chairman had aJilv stood to the attitude lie hail taken up all along the matter would have passed into tlie dim and distant past, and the Council would have had no further say in the matter. Tim Chairman said ho had to thank Mr Evans for the interesting figures he had supplied for tlie report, They set out the position very fully, and he had great hopes that at last the Council would receive a fair amount of justice to their claim.