THAMES HARBOUR.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIII, Issue 4486, 1 November 1922, Page 3

THAMES HARBOUR.

OPPOSITION TO BILL. HOUSE PASSES MEASURE. The Thames Harbour RIH . was passed by the House on Monday morning, but pot before some opposition had been voiced when the Bill was in its second reading stage. Sir William Henries (Tauranga) said there was a good deal of feelihg in his district against being included in the harbour district. The same feeling existed in the portions of the Rotorua and Waikato districts affected, and he thought there was a certain amoupt of dissension in the Ohinemuri district. T.he objection was to certain portions of the Upper Thames district being included in the harbour district He reminded members that in the "eighties," the Thames Board endeavoured to have its jurisdiction extended ito the head of navigation up the Waihou River, and his district always protested. He claimed that the Thames could never be the harbour for the districts in Upper Thames’. z All the produce of this country went to Auckland, and even if a harbour capable of accommodating 10000-ton ships was constructed, which was not likely, their connection would still be with Auckland. They objected to being rated for a harbour which could never serve them. If the Harbour Board would undetake the duties Of a river board and keep the navigation of 1 the Waihou River intact, it would be of some use. Even if the produce from Morrihsville, Te Aroha, and the surrounding districts went to Thames it would still be transhipped to Auckland, so that their best means of communication was the Auckland railway line. He did not think that 10 per cent, of the people of the Matamata county- and town district would vote for a loan to construct a harbour at Thames. Most of the meat from-the districts .mentioned by him was sept to either Horotiu or Auckland, apd all the butter stores were at Auckland. There was no indication that if a harbour were made at Thames, stores would be erected at that place. He hoped to be able to carry an amendment in Committee deferring the operations of the Bill until the end of 1923. Mr H. Poland (Ohinemuri) said he was in a dual position. He represented some districts which were- in favour of the Bill, but a large section round MorrinsviUe was strongly against it. He agreed that, the operation of the Bill should be delayed until the end of next year. The second reading was carried, and when the Bill was in Committee Mr J. A. Young (Waikato) moved that /Matamata county and Matamata town district be struck! from the clause providing for the levy.. This was defeated on a division by 47 votes to 8. Sir William Herries then moved that the Bill come into operation on. January 1, 1924. This was lost by 31 votes tb 27 on a division, and the Bill was put through its final stages and passed.