RIVERS COMMISSION.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIII, Issue 4376, 10 February 1922, Page 3

RIVERS COMMISSION.

report tq parliament. allocation of costs. STATE, COUNTIES, AND BOROUGHS DIVIDED CONTROL ANOMALY. ON THE ’ V AIHOU RIVER. The report of the Waihou and Ohinemuri Rivers Commission, appointed. last year to inquire, ipter alia, into k the allocation ofi the cost of the works authorised under the Improvement Act of 1910, was laid on the table of the House of Representatives yesterday. The commission (consisted of Messrs H. J. H. Blow (chairman),'W. S'. Shortt, and George Buchanan. < THE COST EXCESSIVE. . . in a general survey of its conclusions the commissioners say: “The estimated total cost of the work as disclosed in the evidence (£650,000) is so largely in excess of the original estimate (£130,000) ofi the 1910 commission that to apportion the annual expenses among the contributors ini volves payments at so high a rate as to render it doubtful whether it will be possible for the contributing authorities to bear them.' It is of the utmost importance, therefore, that the cost of the works should be reduced if at all practicable. The commission entrusted to us did not empower us to inquire into the engineering aspect of tjie case, but in view of the importance, and even necessity, of reducing the cost, we think the engineering aspect of the matter should be carefully inquired into. “It seems to us that material econ-i omies are practicable, and it also seems questionable whether some of the land, proposed to be protected is really worth the great cost of protecting it. The area of) land to he protected by the proposed stop-bank on • the east, side of the Upper Waihou, between' Mangaiti and Paeroa, is somewhat limited. If the whole of the stop-bank on that side of the river between these points were omitted, and also the .entire stopibank on the left bank of the Ohinemuri River as far as the railtyayjirldge, and if the Pereniki cut is put in, it seems ' probable that the land that would be prejudicially affected by flooding could be acquired and subsequently resold with an acknowledged liability to flooding, and that the difference between the-purchase and the sale price wpuld be likely to be considerably less than the cost of protecting it would amount to. It quite llk,ely that the putting in of the Pereniki cut would so greatly relieve the Ohinemuri River when in flood that the inundated area without the stopbanks would not be vastly in excess of the area liable-to flood with a stopbank on one side, as now proposed. ' PRIVATE GAINS. “It was brought to our notice that some works had been carried but which seemed to us to be more in the nature of drainage of private .lands than a public drainage scheme., Possibly it was the intention of the department to recover the cost from the private landowners under section 16 of the Act, though it seems a little doubtful whether the provisions of that section would extend quite as Jar as this. PROPOSED TONNAGE RATE. "In our report ‘we have suggested . that the country and borough courii cils should be levied upon for the amounts considered to be fairly payable.by the settlers of the district towards the .annual expenses of the scheme, the loc,al authorities to have power to levy a special rate to reimburse themselves for this outlay.

DIVIDED. CONTROL ANOMALY. The lower portion'of the Waihoti River is withip the jurisdiction of the Thames Harbour Board, 'but it seems to the commissioners that the body which is to control the rest of the river (say, 70 miles in length) should also control the last few miles at the mouth. There are two wharves in this latter portion of the river, a.t which we understand wharfage dues are collected by the Thames Harbour Board. If Che commissioners’ proposal to charge a tonnage rate on all imports to or exports frpm the river, instead of wharfage, is. adopted it would be advisable to make this charge apply to the wharves on the lower reach of the river, as well as to those higher up the stream. It is a matter, therefore, for the Governs ment to consider whether the Thames Harbour Board should not be relieved from administering any portion of the Waihou River’ LOAN TO WAIHI.. "The Boroughs of Waihi is in financial difficulties at the present time, and if, pending a rearrangement of its finances, it could obtain a temporary loan of £lO,OOO the Mayor is of opinion that it- could tide over its difficulties and would also be able to pay the. interest pn the loan. The municipal debt at Waihi is comparatively small, due to the inability of the borough to . borrow <on the security which it is able to offer, but if the Government could see its way to guarantee a loan of £lO,OOO, this diti Acuity would be overcome.” METHOD OF ALLOCATION. In answer to the first specific question put to it, the commission reports as follows: - ‘‘The allocation under, clause (D) sub-section (4) of section 17 of the Waihou and Ohinemuri Rivers Improvement Act, 1910, of! the cost of, providing from April 1, 1921, the in-j 1 terest and sinking fund on any loans raised, for the purpose of parrying 'out the works authorised by the Rivi ers Improvement Act, 1910, together with the cost of administration and maintenance, is not under existing conditions fair and equitable, and the following should be submitted therefor : One half from the Consolidated Fund. One fourth from the counties and boroughs (other than Waihi) within the river district in the undermentioned proportions : Thames County 4 per cent., Hauraki Plains County 8S per cent., Ohinemuri County.2s per cent, Piako County) 15 per J 'cent., Mataihata Count’y 7 per cent;, Thames (Coßflnued In next column).

Continued from prcvilons Column. Borough 3 per cent., Paeroa Borough 7 per cent., Te Aroha Borough 6 pei cent One half the gold duty (including therlein the goldfields revenue) received from mining in the river district. In the event of the gold duty falling below £5OO per annum the Government to retain £250 per annum, and in the event of the duty falling below £250 the Government to retain the and the Waihi Borough Council to pay the difference between the amount retained and the sum o' £250. A charge against all companies and persons discharging mullock, tailings, slimes, or debris into either the Wai-, hou or Ohinemuri Riverp or their tributaries, such charge to be at the rate of Is per ton on all mullock or other material, 90 per cent, of which will not pass through a 159 mesh screen, .arid 4d per tori on all’ ore crushed to the fineness specified.

REPRESENTATION ON .BOARD. Under section 20 of the Act provision is made for a board to control the river improvement scheme. The constitution of the board there t is slated to be 11 members, representing the Ohinemuri County Council (two members), Thames County Council (one), Piako County Council (one), gold mining companies discharging tailings into the river (two), the Gov-ernor-General (two), Waihi Borough Council (one), ratepayers of the river district, except the Waihi Borough (two). Dealing with this the report says the representation on the board proi vided for in section 20- of the Act should be varied as under: The board shall consist of five members, to be appointed or elected from time to time as follows : One member (being the person holding for the time being the office of district engineer of the Public Works Department for the Auckland district)’, to be appointed by the Governor-General;, one member tp be elected by the ‘ratepayers of the river district within the Hauraki Plains County; one member to be elected by the ratepayers of the river district within the Thames and Ohinemurl Counties and the Thames and Paeroa Boroughs : one member to be elected by the Piako and Matamata Counties and. the Te 'Aroha Borough: one member to be, appointed by the Waihi Borough Council; the Government appointee to be the chairman of the board.