GAS CHARGES.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXVII, Issue 1437, 17 August 1915, Page 3

GAS CHARGES.

PROPOSED REDUCTION RECONSIDERED. * A special meeting of the Borough Council was held last night to consider matters in connection with the proposed reduction in the price of gas, decided upon at the previous meeting. There were present: The Mayor (Mr A. Fraser) and Crs. Henderson, Whihley, McColl, Stevenson, Simmons, Thompson, Freeman and Coley. The Mayor said the. business for which the meeting had been called was to reconsider the alteration in the gas charges made at the last meeting. Cr Whihley had come to him and made certain statements and quoted figures and suggested that the gas committee bad not gone as fully into the question as was desirable. In view of the figures quoted he (the. Mayor) had agreed to convene a special meeting in order that the matter could be fully ventilated. CT Whibley’s statements as appeared in a letter to the Press were not quite correct and he thought it was a pity that he had seen fit to write to the paper about it. Had he not been given an opportunity of putting his case before the Council it would lie a different matter, hut when Cr Whibley asked (or a special meeting he (the Mayor) immediately agreed to convene one. He hoped that as long as he occupied the chair he would not be guilty of falling to allow a Councillor full opportunity to put his views and fully discuss any question that came up for decision. In bis letter to the Press Cr Whibley stated that a reduction of tenpence per 1000 ft. in the cooking gas would mean a loss on last year’s consumption of l )Ut he was overlooking the fact that th% previous Council ‘of which he was a member made a reduction in the price of cooking gas and the present proposals did not mean a reduction of teupeuce on those prices. On this alone Cr Whibley’s figures would have to be discounted by at least 5° P er cen b Cr Whibley bad given notice of his intention to move a resolution but according to the Standing Orders ten days’ notice was required of a notice of motion. In order, however, that this matter could be dealt with he moved that the Standing Orders in this case be waived, and this Was agreed to. Cr Whibley said that without replying generally to the Mayor’s remarks he considered that it was open to any Councillor at any time to write to the paper and ventilate any matter if he thought ht. As far as the gas price reduction question was concerned he was convinced in his own mind that a mistake had been made and since the meeting had gone carefully into figures. He was prepared to admit that he had made a mistake Ja the letter to the Press, but his t listake was in underestimating ihe amount ot extra gas it would be necessary to sell at the reduced rate to obtain the same revenue as had been received last year. What he considered should have been done in the present case was for the gas committee to have gone into this matter with the gas manager and then to have submitted it to the finance committee, as it was a matter entirely of finance. He didn’t think it was possible lor four men iu their sane, sober senses to sit for two hours and consider the question and then ask the Council to adopt a report such as the one brought down. Cr Whibley asked for the manager’s report and read from it the reductions proposed to he made. The clause referring to consumers using 50,000 ft. or over had been altered since it had been adopted by the Council by the inclusion of the words “power only,” aud the speaker asked by whose authority the alteration had been made. The Mayor said that any child would know that no consumer would use 50,000 ft. for cooking, and consequently when, he saw the mistake when looking over the report, he had made the alteration. Continuing, Cr Whibley said they could only deal with the report as it was passed by the Council and not as according to alterations made subsequently without reference to the Council, The report provided that any consumer of gas through one meter who used more than 2000 ft. was entitled to get it at the lowest rate, 5s rod per 1 oooft. The Mayor; Nonsense ! Cr Whibley : It is no nonsense at all. That is what the report adopted by the Council provides. The Mayor : You are splitting straws. Why was the 50,000 ft, put in ? Cr Whibley ; Lord only knows, I don’t. But the fact remains that the Council adopted the report with the clause in and no alteration made by the Mayor without being passed by the Council would have any effect. The speaker quoted instances .of where consumers could save money by wasting gas, such waste entitling them to the reduced price which on the larger consumption would amount to less than if they only burned their usual amount. The Mayor : Why waste it. Did anyone ever hear of consumers wasting gas ? Cr Whibley: lam pointing out that consumers under the proposed new scale can afford to waste gas in order .to entitle them to the reduced price, and then be better off than if they only used the small amount they generally used. The Mayor: I object to that statement. Cr Whibley: “I have the floor, Mr Mayor.” He contended the position was as he had stated it. The Mayor said there was never any question of selling gas for cooking at 5 s I0^»

Cr Whiblcy said that according to the report adopted that was the price for 2,0001 t. and over. The statement appeared in the report before them in cold print. The Mayor: You don’t want to believe everything you see in print. Cr Whibley said he was pleased to see that the Mayor did take notice of some things he saw in print. According to the adopted report, a billiard room, hotel or shop would get all the gas they consumed at 5s rod per thousand provided they used over 2,000 ft. At the previous meeting the Mayor stated that even if the consumption ot gas was not increased the loss would only be .£6O iu a year. He didn’t know if the Mayor intended to mislead the Council, but this remark was certainly misleading. Cr McColl said that if the reduction in price were made con snniers would increase their consumption, and be quite agreed with those, remarks. If people could use more gas and then pay less than they paid previously (or their ordinary consumption there was no doubt they would burn more. The proposal was a good proposition for the big consumer, but it was a very poor proposition from the ’ ratepayers’ point of view. On the consumption for the month of May he had worked out the figures, and the revenue 011 the existing scale of charges amounted to 8s 6(1, but it the reduced prices were in operation the revenue would have ouly been £ll2 g* Sd, a total loss of 8 18s lod. On these figures he estimated that iu a year, taking lighting aud cooking gas together, it would bs necessary to sell a further three-quarters of a million feet at the reduced price to gel the same revenue as last year. He hoped that seeing an alteration in the report as adopted had already been found necessary that the Council would agree to refer same to the Finance Committee for further consideration. He moved, “That before any alteration is in the price of gas the question be referred to the Finance Committee for further consideration.” The motion was seconded by Cr Thompson. The Mayor said Cr Whibley made a special point ol the statement that it had been found necessary to make an alteration in the report. The mistake was so obvious that uoue would think otherwise than that it should be altered to read as intended, aud consequently he had marie the alteration. Cr Thompson said on the case set forward the mover was quite justified in asking that the matter should be further considered. In addition to those quite a distance from the gas area, there were no less than 56 houses adjacent to the present mains who could not at present get the gas, and he asked was it fair to expect them to help make good any loss brought about by the reduction in price. Why should they be expected to pay the extra rate necessary ? The Mayor; There will ho no extra rate. Cr Thompson contended that no one could make a definite statement 011 that point. There was a large portion of the borough not served with gas, and it was unfair to expect the ratepayers in that area to make good any probable loss to benefit the consumers. Cr Freeman said the point for consideration was whether the reduction would mean a loss in the future. At the last meeting Ur McColl had said that it would not, and he (Cr Freeman) bad supported the motion on that statement. He had not given it much consideration at the time. It the price were to lie reduced they should have some guarantee that they would get more consumers. It was a matter that should not be decided too hastily. Cr Henderson considered that Cr Whiblcy had jumped to conclusions, ami rushed into print rather hastily. There was nothing in his argument as to wasting gas —it was not likely that people were going to waste it. The Council had a supply of cookers coming to hand, and if these were to be sold it was necessary to reduce the price of gas. As tar us the rale was concerned, he didn’t think the day was far distant when it would disappear altogether. He didn’t see why Foxton should not be able to sell gas as cheaply as otner places similarly situated. Cr Stevenson said that at the previous meeting he supported the reductions, as he was then under the impression that the gas committee bad thoroughly considered the matter. However, he was now of opinion that it would be better to give the matter further consideration. Cr McColl said he wished to make an explanation in reference to the remarks passed by him at the last meeting. What he had meant to say was that they would not get any more consumers unless the price was reduced. He would like to ask Cr Whibley if he supported the last reduction In price. Cr Bryant said that a mistake was made in the first place iu rating those outside the area. If the works could not “stand on their own bottom” the Council should not have taken them over. If they found the reductions decided upon were not satisfactory, they could again revert to the original scale. To get more consumers it was necessary to reduce the prices. The Mayor said the previous Council bad reduced the price of gas to large consumers, which had been of advantage to them, or, in Cr Wbibley’s words, was a good proposition lor the big consumer, but the present Council was de-

slrous of extend in a: the same eoncession to the workers. Their idea was to give the bulk of the people in the borough a chance to use the gas by reducing the price and thus inducing them to burn gas. In conversation with Mr Blackman, of Masterton, he had said that if the Foxton people waiited their works to pay —if they wanted to wipe out the presold gas rate—they must reduce the price of gas and thus induce the people to use it. The cooking gas department was the mainstay of any gas works. In Waipawa the works had only been erected two years, and they had 6S gas cookers, and in Dargaville, works erected under two years, there’were 7S gas cookers in use. b'oxton’s works had been erected for six or seven years, and there were only 37 cookers installed. One councillor asked why Foxton could not, produce g‘" 'dieaply as other places. T.. . -..’d, hut the 1 rouble was they' were faced with so much heavier charges for interest and sinking fund Ilian towns where the municipality had erected their own works. Foxton’s trouble was that they had bought their works second hand. He was certain in his own mind that the only way to make the works pay was to reduce the. price of gas and thus induce greater consumption. Any business man would know that to get business it was neces sary to offer inducements. The trouble was that a lot of people were so afraid of losing a pound this year that they never looked ahead to see what the benefit would be in the future. The reduction made by the previous Council had not resulted in any loss, but there had been a profit, and he was-absolutely certain that the present reduction would not result in a loss, hut would he an advantage to the works. They had a big supply of conkers coming to band which would have to be paid for out of revenue. What were they going to do, sell them or “scrap” them ? Unless the price was reduced they would not be able to sell them, Cr Whihley spoke o f , a loss 011 tlie cooking rate, hut they were asking people to increase their consumption of gas, and thus get a reduction. Surely the increased consumption would more than pay for the reductions made. 111 reducing the lighting rate to 9s 2d they were only reducing it to the same level as the highest charge made by any municipal concern in New Zealand. Unless they were prepared to take a business ilsk they would never make a business success. On last month’s figures the proposed reductions as far as the cooklug rate was concerned would only have amounted to £5 2s id. Mr Blackman had staled that the lighting consumption was practically a fixed amount, but the consumption for cooking depended on the price charged, and if the price was right people would use the gas. In Oreytown the charge was 3s per thousand tor 1000 ft. and over. Mr Blackman stated that when he went to Masterton the charges were Ss gd and 6s Sd and there were about 70 cookers in use and now the price was 7s 6d and >s 3d and there were over 700 cookers installed. It was the cooking gas department that had “made” the Masterton gas works and for any works to pay it was necessary to encourage the people to use gas stoves. In conclusion lie said if the Council wanted the winks to pay the. prices had to be reduced. On the other hand it 1 hoy weic satisfied as things were and wanted to continue collecting the rate they should continue the present prices. In the course of his reply Cr Whiblcy said that it appeared that most Councillors, were under the impression that to make the works pay it was necessity to reduce the price ol cooking gas so as to induce more consumption, but if this were so why was the lighting rale being reduced. The Mayor pointed out that the reduction was such a trifling amount that the loss of revenue would not be noticed, but if as he says the redaction is so trifling, will it not be too trifling to induce people to increase their consumption. Then the suggestion had been made that it it were found the reduced prices were not salislactory they could revert to the old scale. Did they think anyone would go to the expense of putting in a cooker when they knew the reduced prices were only to be given twelve months’ trial. He wauled to make it quite clear that until the Council authorised the alteration made by the Mayor the report as previously passed was iu force, and, as it had been found necessary to make an alteration it showed that he was fully justihed in having a special meeting called to reconsider the report. Had he not moved iu the matter the lower price would have been in force. As far as the reduction decided upon by the previous Council was concerned he believed be opposed it. If the Council wanted to induce people to use gas for cooking why not have one rate—why should one person be charged more than another, Cr Coley said the only mistake in the adopted report was the omission of the word “power. On being put the mod on was lost, the voting being : For—Crs. Whibley, Thompson, Stevenson and Simmons. Against ; The Mayor and Crs. Bryant, Coley, Freeman, Henderson and McColl. On the motion of the Mayor, seconded by Cr Coley, the following alteration in the report previously adopted, was agreed to: “That the words ‘power only’ be inserted in front of the figures 50,oooft. .in the scale of charges and the words <and if 5.00° ft * or over be used through a cooker the net charge be 5s rod per thousand’ be deleted.