FOXTON WHARF.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 1272, 16 July 1914, Page 3

FOXTON WHARF.

HARBOUR BOARD AND RAILWAY DEPARTMENT,

DEPUTATION TO MINISTERS.

For a long time past the people of the Foxton Harbour district have had a grievance against the Railway Department arising out of the fact that the Department holds the Foxton Wharf and collects the bulk of the harbour revenue. The Department is willing to sell the wharf, but claims that it is entitled to base the price upon the capitalised earnings of the wharf. A deputation from the harbour district which interviewed the Right Hon. W. F. Massey (Prime Minister), the Hon. W. H. Herries (Minister of Railways) and the Hon. F. M. B. Fisher (Minister of Marine) on Monday, maintained that the Foxton Harbour Board was being treated unfairly by the Railway Department. Mr J. Robertson, M.P., who introduced the deputation, said that it represented the Foxton Harbour Board, the Palmerston North, Levin and Foxton Borough Councils, and the Palmerston North and Levin Chambers of Commerce. This matter of the wharf had created a great deal of feeling locally apart from all politics and parties. The people leit that it was a great injustice that their Harbour Board should not have control oi their owu wharf and the revenue therefrom.

FOXTON’S DISABILITIES. Mr P. J. Hennessy (chairman of the Foxton Harbour Board) raised the question of an arrangement agreed to by the Hon. J. A. Millar, when he was Minister of Railways, to sell the Foxton wharf to the Harbour Board for ■£20,000. Mr Hennessy said that ou previous occasions when he had mentioned this arrangement he had been asked for proof. He now produced a copy of the Bill covering the arrangement, which was drafted, but not gone on with, in igix, and also a letter from Mr Millar saying that he supported the Bill, The Board now desired to purchase the wharf for £20,000 and to issue debentures against the purchase money. Mr Massey : You want the Railway Department to accept £20,000 for the wharf ?

Mr Hennessy: That is so, ' Mr Massey ; Is it not a fact that the Railway Department offered you the vt harf at an amount based on its net earnings ? Mr Hennessy ; We as a Harbour Foard claim that the Railway Department is not entitled to the net earnings. It we were allowed to enpy the privileges we are entitled to under the Act we would not give anything at all tor the present, wharf. It.is simply because the Department blocks us that we are forced to come here on our knees to the Government and make this offer.

Mr Massey : There are several wharves in the same position ? Mr Hennessy : There are several other wharves, but they have endowments or other revenue to help their finance.

Mr Herries mentioned Nelson and Port Chalmers.

Mr Hennessy: They all have valuable endowments of one kind or another.

Mr Herries : That has nothing to do with the Railway Department.

• Mr Nash said that the Bill and letter produced showed that Mr Millar was prepared to accept ,£20,000. He suggested that the Government should accept payment of this amount with Interest, say, at four per cent, and one-half per cent, sinking fund. Taking the last fourteen years—and the Department had held the wharf for longer than that—the revenue had averaged £xooo a year, so that the Department had made more than £14,000 out of the wharf. Mr Massey said that as far as he could see the matter was one in which he was not concerned, except as Prime Minister, It was a matter between the Foxton Harbour Board and the Railway Department, and the difference between them seemed to be that between £20,000 and £28,000. Mr Herries ; That was the valuation two years ago. It is £36,000 now. THE BOARD’S PREDICAMENT.

Mr Hennessy said that the Minister ot Marine had said that if he gave a permit to build another wharf he might be up against the Railway Department, and the Minister of Railways had not given any definite answer when asked if he would give rail* way connection to another whan. In fixing a price for the wharf, the Railway Department had capitalised the earnings not of the wharf but of the port, and it was able to do this through the Board not being allowed to carry out its functions as a Board. This was not fair play. , , , Mr Herries said that he had offered to subsidise expenditure by the Marine Department in deepening the channel. It was not quite fair to say that the Department was against the Harbour Board. Mr Hennessy: We want to be put in the same position as any other harbour board in New Zealand. Mr G. Stiles (Mayor of Foxton) said that it would be much better for the district generally if the Harbour Board obtained possession of the whaif. They had given up talking about the moral aspect of the question, and were now approaching the matter from the business point of view. They asked that they should be allowed to buy the wharf for ,£20,000, and that the Government grant such terms, by way of debentures or otherwise,

as would enable the Board to make the purchase without calling upon a rating area. All that they wanted was an opportunity to make their port what it should be. They had got practically no hearing from the past Government; they hoped to get a square deal from this Government.

Mr B. R. Gardener (Mayor of Levin) said that Foxton harbour served between 35,000 and 40,000 people, and an area of dose on a couple of thousand sqiure miles. In Levin they felt the position pretty acutely, because they felt that Foxton was the natural port of that part of the-district. There was an idea that the revenue of £I4OO derived from the wharf belonged to the whole Dominion, but in equity practically the whole of it should be spent in improving the port of Foxton.

Mr E. H. Crabb said that this was a serious matter for Palmerston North. Merchants there were crippled in many lines as compared with merchants in other places. It was not fair that the Railway Department should retard the development of the port. THE RIVER IN BAD ORDER. Mr B, Holben (Palmerston N.) said that even a small steamer like the Waverley was apt to stick in sand banks going up the Foxton river in its present state. Mr Massey: The Railway Department offered to contribute to the cost of dredging; the river, didn’t they ?

Mr Holben: We understand that, sir, but there is more than that to be done. Mr Herries offered to provide £4OO, and the Minister of Marine undertook to provide a similar sum. But we have to purcha ;e a dredge, and our present i: come does not exceed £550.

Mr D. Buick. M.P., said that the Foxton Harbour was the heritage ot the people of Manawatu, and he did not think it was ever intended to be a source of revenue to the rest of -h* Dominion. The whari was tLheritage of the Foxton Harbor. Boai . 'J a revenu.; which at

present went to the Railway Department should be spent entirely on the improvement of Foxton harbour. Nothing had been spent upon the harbour lor ten or twelve yeatb, and it had got into such a state tuat it vas unfit fur ordinary navigation. Kc hoped that the Government and Mr Massey, as P.ime Minister, would see that justice w;-s done to the people of Mancwatu. Mr Massey said they must always bear in mind the fact that Mr Herries was, for the time being, the trustee for the people of the country in regard to railway property, which included wharves. It had been said that the Railway Department was willing to sell the wharf. Mr Herries: That value was fixed two years ago.

Mr Massey said that the price which had been mentioned was £28,000, and that offer still stood. That was a fair value —

Mr Holben: Would ycu consider it sound business to collect £1,400 a year in revenue and put nothing in for maintenance? Mr Herries: We are spending something on the wharf. Mr Holben: You have only done it during the last month, honourable sir, and it has been built for the last thirty years.

Mr Nash asked whether the Railway Department would accept £28,000 at the rate of £I,OOO a year.

Mr Herries said that the Foxton Harbour Board had offered him

,£28,000 on certain terms —on such terms as would require a special Act, which could not be got through the House unless provision were made for a poll. Mr Massey (to Mr Nash) : A thousand a year, with interest ? Mr Nash: Without interest, is that not a reasonable offer ?

Mr Massey : I should say that if the valuation of the wharf at £28,000 is sound it is not a reasonable offer. Mr Hennessy : The Government have taken up a position that is not honest. MR. BERRIES IN PROTEST. Mr Herries: I must protest against that! I have endeavoured ever since I assumed office as Minister of Railways, to meet you in every possible way, I have kept the offer in front of you that I made two years ago. I object to Mr Hennessy saying I am not honest.

Mr Hennessy said that he was not saying the honourable gentleman was not honest.

Mr Herries: It is not the way to get what you want —accusing people of not being honest. Mr Hennessy : It is not honest dealing on the part of the Government to ask us as a Harbour Board to pay so much for a wharf that is valued at not more than ,£3.000. lam very sorry I hurt the honourable gentleman’s feelings. Mr Herries: I am trying to meet you in every possible way, but I cannot sell the wharf at what you want to give me when my Department says it is worth ,£36,000. ARBITRATION SUGGESTED. The Hon. F. M. B. Fisher said that he had visited the Foxton district and had heard a number of similar deputations, but all were barren of result. He did not think it a wise proposal that the Board should pay ,£I,OOO a year for 28 years. The wharf was not worth ,£28,000. It would require rebuilding long before they finished paying for it. He believed—he did not know whether

' b colleagues would agree with him —that the only way out ol the difficulty was by means ot arbitration. It the Railway Department and Harbour Board would agree to this an engineer could be appointed to assess the value of the wharf. Mr Herries: And also of the goodwill ? Mr hisher: Yes ; that could be assessed separately. I think that arbitration is the only way out. In the meantime, if nothing comes of this I stand by the offer to give £4OO, the Railway Department givihg a similar amount. Mr Stiles said the amount of nett revenue of the wharf had been capitalised at 3)4 per cent. This was unreasonable. Local bodies could not borrow at 3)4 per cent. He suggested that this revenue should be capitalised at 5 per cent, which would considerably reduce the value as assessed by the Department. Mr Buick said that the money earned by the wharf should be spent on the river, and should not go to the Railway Department. Whether the Department or the Board held the wharf, the revenue, after deducting working expenses, should be expended upon river improvements. 4 TENTATIVE AGREEMENT. After some further discussion Mr Nash asked whether the offer made by the Minister of Marine would be acceptable to the Minister of Railways. Mr Herries: I should have to put that before Cabinet. Mr Massey : Better let it stand at that, gentlemen. We can’t go any further until it has been before Cabinet.

Mr Fisher : In the event of the Minister of Railways placing a recommendation before Cabinet to submit to arbitration, would that be acceptable to the Harbour Board ?

Hr Hennessy said that he was heartily sick of it. He was always bumping up against somebody. He had spent the last five years in trying to get justice done to the town of his adoption, and he would be prepared, personally speaking, to accept the suggestion of the Minister of Marine. They were labouring under a grave injustice at present. Mr Massey: Are we to understand that you are prepared to go to arbitration ?

Mr Nash (after conferring with the other deputationists): Yes. It was mentioned that only one member of the Foxton Harbour Board was absent.

Mr Massey : All right, we will leave it at that.