THE PROPOSED HARBOUR BOARD.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 386, 16 May 1908, Page 2

THE PROPOSED HARBOUR BOARD.

Our readers have been kept well informed, per medium of these columns, as to the steps taken from time to time by the local Chamber of Commerce and its energetic President (Mr P. J. Hennessy), in reference to the constitution, of a Harbour Board to govern the port of Foxton. At present the port is controlled jointly by the Marine Department and the Railway. The former department expend annually more iu the little they do than they receive in revenue from reserves and dues; the pilot’s salary is also met by the Marine Department. The Railway Department control the wharf, audit is from this source that a considerable annual profit is derived, which, instead of beingutilised for the purpose of improving the river in order to facilitate shipping, goes to swell the revenue of the working railways. Having these facts in view, the Chamber of Commerce has undertaken the task of having the water way and wharf placed under the control of a board, in order that shipping may be on a more satisfactory footing, and that an end be put to the present iniquitous state of things. A Bill was drafted, and the object of the deputation’s visit to Wellington was to wait on the Minister for Mariune in order to know the extent of endowments, which could be included in the proposed Bill. The deputation consisted of the following : —Mr P. J. Hennessy (President of the Foxton Chamber of Commerce), Mr George Stiles (vice - president), Messrs F. W. Frankland, M. Perreau, M. H. Walker, W. White, J. K. Hornblow, and R. Moore.

Mr John Stevens arranged a meeting with the Minister for Marine for Tuesday afternoon, and in introducing the deputation, said all they wanted was to carry out the recommendation of the Minister that they should form a Harbour Board, and that certain endowments might be made to the Board. There was one piece of laud at the mouth of the river, and a second a little inland, on which there was a clump of native bush, which ought to be reserved for all time, since it was one of tire bestknown laud-marks for mariners on the coast. These reserves were of little value, since they were covered with drift-sand, and the Government had declined to give any grunt to plant trees lor reclamation purposes. Then they wanted to have vested in them the foreshore on both sides of the river as far as Hartley’s Bend. He had also applied in his letter for the control of wharves to be handed over to the Board, but it appeared that the Marine Department and the Railway Department were not favourable to that. Their reasons for refusal were best known to themselves. To hand over the wharf would be merely an exchange of authority. Neither in the case of the reserves nor the control of the wharf would anything be given away- There would only be a change of control. He impressed on the Minister the necessity for expedition in the matter. In order that the standing orders of the House might be fully complied with, he asked that the Lands Department should supply the necessary certified plans so that there should be no delay when the time came. The Chamber of Commerce asked that the wharf dues which were now collected by the Railway Department should continue to be so collected, but should be handed over to the Board, less per cent., which, he believed, was the per centage deducted in the case of Wanganui and Patea.

Mr P. J. Hennessy said when it was agreed by the Chamber of Commerce that they should form a Harbour Board he paid a visit to Patea to study the conditions there. He understood that the Railway Department collected the wharfage dues, charged for handling cargo, and 2]A per cent, commission, and also for wear-aud-tear expenses, and handed the balance over to the Board. This would give them the necessary finance to carry out works of improvement. Their endowments at present were practically nil. He had not taken them into consideration at all in drawing up an estimate of the receipts and expenditure under their -proposed Bill. They believed they would be able to finance the Board on the same lines as at Patea if they formed one. Mr F. W. Frankland said their great aim was to apply to the river a moderate amount of expenditure, which would render it navigable to the full extent. Foxton should be one of the great ports of the future for the country extending right through from Danuevirke to Eketahuua and Pahiatua for there was no reason why the Ma nawatu should not be comparable with the Wanganui in this respect. They really did not care for the endowments if they could only get some of the wharf dues, as was the case at Patea and Wanganui. No great amount of expenditure was necessary to render the Foxton port as good as Wanganui. Mr Hennessy remarked that the bar was in a bad state at present, and it seemed to be no one’s duty to attend to it. He referred to the fact of shipping being hampered and boats having to be sent on to other ports. Mr Stevens considered Foxton should be the harbour for all the countty, including Palmerston N., Feilding, Marton, Halcombe, Tai-

Deputation Waite on the Ministers. Cabinet Will Take Action.

hape, Bulls, Rongotea and Saudcu, and adjacent country, which were vitally interested in the matter. Foxton was the most suitable port lor all these places. Mr J. K. Hornblovv suggested that the Minister should visit Foxton and observe the disabilities of the port arising out of the dual control. There was no inducement for shippers to go there to unload coal, although Foxton ought to be a great coal depot for the railways when the Main Trunk railway was opened- This was a point which the Government should keep in view. THE MINISTER RE PETES. The Hon. J. A. Millar said in reply, when he had suggested the formation of a Harbour Board, they were talking about the expenditure ot ,£25,000, and he told them it was hopeless to expect the Government to do that. They had got a Bill drafted as he suggested, but one important thing which he suggested was that they should constitute a rating district. The Bill contained absolutely no such proposals. The district was to consist of simply the town of Foxton. They must know the the river as well as he did, and if they thought of confining their activities to the collection of dues they would never make Foxton the port they wished. The whole matter had been before Cabinet. Mr Stevens in his letter stated that it was not coratemplated there would be any necessity for the striking of a harbour rate. When he got that letter he saw the Railway Department, and they declined absolutely to hand over the wharf or the revenues to the Board, because the dues they collected did not much more than pay working expenses. (This statement caused a smile to come over the features of the deputation). The Hands Department had supplied the following particulars of the value of the reserves which the deputation wanted to lie vested in the Board : Acres. Value-

Foreshore south bank 85 106 Foreshore north bank 135 675 Signal station ... 470 3290 Pilot reserve ... 360

Total 1050 4071 Supposing they got five per cent, on these endowments, that would only give them ,£2OO a year, whereas they would require a year for interest on an expenditure of ,£20,000, even if they got the money at per cent. If they took over the port they would also have to take over the harbourmaster. Unless they got a bigger share of the revenue than was shown in the Bill it would not be worth a rap. Personally he did not object to their getting the reserves, but he did not see that they would do any good. Except with the expenditure of a very Urge sum of money they could - not expect to make that river navigable for the class of vessels they wanted, namely coal ships carrying seven or eight hundred tons, lie was willing to assist the deputation, but all matters relating to the transfer of endowments had to go before Cabinet, and this caused a certain delay. The transfer of the lands suggested meant general revenue became local revenue. If they granted these endowments every Harbour Board that came along would demand the same, and they had last year refused any endowment at all to the Wairau Board. The Marine Department revenue and expenditure at Foxton for the last two years was thus :

1906-7 1907-8 £ £ Revenue 264 9 11 230 18 9 Expenditure 240 8 ir 485 16 5 Of the expenditure of last year was in improving the channel. Now, if they had the reserves and leased them as proposed in the Bill the revenue from the source in thirty-three years would not be more than £260 a year, so they would have to find some other source of revenue for improving the river. As to getting control -of the wharf, they would have to consult the Railway Department. Mr Hennessy said the revenue at Patea was X'3212 for the year, and the expenditure without allowing a penny for endowments. The receipts at Foxton for the last year were and the expenditure estimated on the same basis as at Patea was ,£1563, leaving a credit of ,£1650. Mr Millar questioned the accuracy of the figuies. Mr Hennessy said he had got them from the Railway Department.

Mr Horublow remarked that if local bodies sanctioned - a rating area, which was doubtful, the revenue so derived would be diverted towards swelling the railway profits. The deputation was satisfied that the Marine Department was treating the port fairly. Mr Stevens : If there is that amount collected by the Railway Department, which does not expend fivepence on the harbour, and it goes to swell the revenue of the working railways, I say it is an absurdity. M!r Millar: Of course I cannot tell you what the railway gets out of it. Mr Stevens : I think it is a matter for Cabinet to deal with. I do not know why a department having nothing to do with another de-

partment should control its destiny. Tha Railway Department is dictating what should be done for the port of Foxtou and taking money that should properly go to the improvements of the harbour, and I say that it is a matter that Cabinet should deal with promptly.

Mr Millar ; When the Nelson trouble was on, the Railway Department absolutely declined to give over the wharves. At Port Chalmers they did the same. Mr Stevens: The position as far as your department is concerned is a difficult one, but the matter ought to be remedied. It is an injustice that thousands of pounds should be taken to swell the revenue of the Railway Department and the port of Foxton should starve lor want of expenditure. Mr Millar said the Marine Department would be only too glad to see a Harbour Board formed if the people were satisfied they could finance it, but they would have to get the sanction of the Railway Department before he could support a bill which proposed to hand over the dues to the Board. He was quite prepared to support the Bill and to ask Cabinet to grant the endowments asked for. Mr F. W. Frankland ; Cannot Cabinet overrule the Railway Department in the interests of the Dominion ? Mr Millar: Get the Minister of Railways, He is the man you have to get over. It is a big question because there aie so many railway wharves throughout the country, and once you hand them over as endowments to a board there is no reason for refusing any other board. There are wharves which cost the Government thirty or forty thousand pounds. Mr Stevens repeated that it was a monstrous thing to credit working railways with the earnings of these wharves.

The deputation thanked the Minister and arranged an interview with the Minister for Railways for Wednesday. Several members of the deputation had to return to Foxton but the remainder waited upon the Hon. Hall-Jones, Minister for Railways, on Wednesday. The deputation was introduced by Mr John Stevens M.P. Mr. Stevens stated that the deputation desired to bring under notice the unsatisfactory position in which the port of Foxton stood at the present time. It was a certainty that if some improvement were not soon made there would continue to be trouble and serious loss through vessels being unable to go in and out of the port with freedom. The position in fact, was one which in justice ought not be be allowed to continue. At present the Marine Department received the fees for pilotage, and had to pay the pilot and his assistants. It had expended on dredging, etc., some £l5O over and above the amount which had come in from this source. On the other hand, he was informed, the Railway Department owned the wharf and received all dues, both inward and outward. These amounted to a very large sum of money, and after making provision for the working of the wharf, there ap peared to be a surplus of about £2650. That money was derived from ships visiting the port, arid it appeared to him that in the public interest a reasonable proportion at least should be expended in making the river passably navigable. But as things now stood no improvement could be made. That was why they advocated the formation of a Harbour Board and the handing over to it of the wharf. The board, he considered, should be treated in the same way as those at Wanganui and Patea. If that were done it would be a very good thing, but if not he would only be able to say that an injustice of the past had been continued. Just now the whole thing was run for the benefit of the working railways, and not for the harbour at all. He had been desired to ask the Minister whether, in the event of the desired concession being found to l:e impracticable, he w'outd devise some proposal of an equivalent nature. For instance, he suggested that the Government should sell to the Harbour Board —if. in existence —the wharf on terms of repayment similar to those allowed to local bodies borrowing for forty-two-years. If any scheme could be formulated to allow the funds accruing to be expended for the benefit of the harbour and not of the railway, he was sure it would be very thankfully accepted. Mr Hennessy again read the figures showing the estimated receipts and expenditure of the proposed Board. The Board, he said, would not be one without finance as might be thought. If only the Railway Department could see its way clear to forego the wharfages, he had no doubt as to the ultimate result and what the Foxton Harbour Board would be.

Mr Frankland thought that the figures submitted would satisfy the Minister as to the equities of the position, though he was able to conceive that in their ignorance of administrative details the members of the deputation had gone the wrong way to work. For that reason they were willing to accept anything which the Minister might be able to devise as an equivalent.

The Minister said he thought, with his colleague, that the deputation had undertaken a laudable task. There was no doubt that all the West Coast ports would be affected by the completion of the Main Trunk line, and assuredly Foxton would feel the benefit more than the ports of Wanganui and Patea, for the reason that goods coming from Martou would be able to travel directly south. When they had that line completed and

had assumed control of the Manawatu railway, it would be found that shippers from Wellington would be compelled to send stuff by rail instead of by water because of the charges now imposed over the Manawatu line making the freight very heavy on stuff going right through to, say, Ohakune. But at Foxtou this would not quite come in, and he believed that the deputation was taking a very wise step in endeavouring to improve the accommodation and in attempting to establish a board to control the harbour. He could foresee that the trade at that port must increase with better accommodation. The question was as to who was ; to pay the cost. The deputation practically asked that the wharf—which had been built as part and parcel of the railway system at a cost of some and on which or some two or three years ago, had' been expended for upkeep—should be handed over to them by the Railway Department. Now, the railways belonged to the Government only in so lar as they were trustees for the people as a wkole, and it was their duty to safeguard the interests of the people, and refuse to grant concessions where they would result in a diminution of the revenue. He could see that if the vvhail were, handed over the railway revenue would suffer. Everything in connection with the running of the railways had increased of late. For instance, the concessions in wages granted last year amounted they had not heard anything about increasing the cost of carriage of either goods oj- passengers. For this reason he had to be very careful, though he approved the proposal to form a Harbour Board, and would have pleasure in voting for it if Mr Stevens were to bring down a Bill lor that purpose. Therefore, when he said that he could not agree with the request to baud the wharf over, they would understand why it was. He agreed that it would be a mistake to confine the harbour district to the town of Foxton. Though it might be urged that the improvement of the port would mean competition with the railways, he could fore‘see the time when the traffic over the Manawatu Hue would be so great that the Government would be glad to encourage some other way of dealing with part of it. Then as to the suggested equivalent and the proposal to sell the wharf to the Board, he did not think this latter would be a wise step, as the wharf ought to remain part of what it was originally built lor —a portion of the railway system. The nature of the proposed equivalent had not been suggested. However, he would lay their represeuta tions before Cabinet. The question just was, as to whether Government would in any way assist them to undertake, what he believed, would be a very important work to the whole of the district.

Mr Hennessy asked why could they not be treated like Palea and Wanganui ? The Minister: The wharves there were not built by .the Railway Department. Mr Hennessy had understood from enquiries made at these places that the Government had built them. • The Minister: Perhaps so; • but not as part of the working railways. The wharves at Foxton are part and parcel of the railway scheme. Mr Hennessy : The river is part and parcel of the birthright of the district, and if the Railway Department choose to build wharves there and claim it as part of the railway, I do not see where the justice is of letting the present state of things continue for all time. It will be impossible to prescribe a district and strike a rate because that portion is already included in the Wellington Harbour Board District. . If it had not been for the tail way wharf, said the Minister, where would Foxton be now ? Mr Stevens said that the gravel taken from the river bed was used by the Railway Department to : the extent of thousands of. yards >-yet this had not been credited to the wharf at all. It would have cost at least 3s 6d a yard to supply similar metal. It seemed they were to hear all about the expenditure and nothing about the receipts. Mr Hennessy said some thousands of yards of this metal had been taken by the borough of Foxton at 2s a yard. The Minister said he had overlooked this matter of the gravel, and it certainly was an item of credit. Mr Stevens : If Patea can be treated as it has been, why not Manawatu ? It means they are getting an advantage denial to Manawatu.

The Minister: In the one case, the wharf was built as part of the railways, and ’in the other, it was not.

Mr Frankland : We would pay you the interest on the cost of construction, etc., if you would let us ' have the gross revenue. The Minister promised to look into the matter, and forward his decision to Mr Stevens in due course, and the deputation withdrew.

The remainder of the deputation returned to Foxton on Thursday night. (Press comments crowded out of this issue).