THE PRICE OF GAS.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 2041, 14 October 1919, Page 3

THE PRICE OF GAS.

A FURTHER INCREASE,

At last night’s Council meeting thq following recommendation from the Gas Committee was considered:

“That from October Ist, 1.9.1 D, the price of gas for lighting ho 13s 4d ‘per 1,000 ft reducible to 10s nett if paid before the 15th of the following month, and the price of gas for cooking, heating and power be 10s lOd per 1,000 ft,, reducible by Is 3d per 1,000 ft. on consumptions under 1,000 ft., and 2s Id for 1,000 ft. on consumptions of 1,000 ft. and over, if paid before the loth of the following month.” In moving that the report he adopted, the Mayor said that at the last monthly meeting of the Council when reviewing the position of the gas works, he had stated that lie was opposed to any increase in the price of gas. ‘When he made that statement he did not anticipate a substantial rise in the price of coal. As a matter of fact, there had been three increases in the price of coal recently, two of which had been made since the last monthly meeting of the Council, amounting in all to four shillings and six pence per ton on Westport and two shillings per ton on Taupiri coal., Westport was now costing £2 (is 9d per ton in the gasworks yard. When the present manager look over the works this coal was costing £1 14s Od per ton in the yard, and the nett price of gas for lighting was 9s 2d per 1,000 ft., at which price it has remained till the present, in spile of increases in the price of coal totalling 12s 9d per ton. The Gas Works Committee had gone into the question very fully, and it was estimated that the new prices proposed would cover coM of production for the current financial year. That was all that was required. It was not intended to build up a fund of profits, hut to keep (he price of gas at bedrock cost to ensure a large production, for the benefit of the.consumers. 'When'it was taken into consideration that a large number of ratepayers in the Borough were unable to gel the convenience of gas for lighting and cooking, hut had been called upon to pay rates for capital expenditure in connection with the works, he thought ail would agree that it Avon Icl be manifestly unfair to now ask those ratepayers for an additional rale to pay the extra working expenses. It was not fair for the people in the reticulated area to expect the ratepayers unhide that area (o assist them to pay for their gas. lie thought that when the price of coal fell and the situation warranted it, the price of gas should lie reduced again. Gr. Walker said that when ho suggested at the last meeting that the gas works should he made selfsupporting, Ids idea was to reduce the discounts. This wouldn't look so glaring to the public, but in the end would mean the same thing as increasing (he price. Cr. Thompson said that, the rate- . payers outside the gas area had had to pay a gas rate at! along, and could not get gas if they wanted it. Even in the reticulated area the ratepayer was at a disadvantage as compared with the leaseholder, as he liad to pay for his gas and also pay a gas rate, but the tenant only paid for gas used, and contributed nothing towards the gas rate.

Cr. Bryant: Rot! Isn’t that included in his rent ? The (Mayor: Tenants pay their share indirectly in their rents. Cr. Coley; "What about (hose that don't pay their rent at till? Continuing. Cr. Thompson said that at present the ratepayer was helping to pay his neighbour's gas iu rates. He contended that the price of gas should be raised so as make the works pay. Cr. Me Murray said Cr. Thompson was wrong. The rate was being collected to pay the sinking fund. To expect the consumer to pay this would be asking him to pay for the. ratepayers’ property. The Mayor said that it would be quite unfair to eliminate the rate and put it on the consumer. What they wanted to do was to encourage a large consumption. On a production of five million feet per year the interest and sinking fund amounted to 3s per 1,000 ft., tjie set charges for wages (manager and assistant) meant 2s 2s per 1,000 ft., and Westport coal at £2 0s 9d per ton landed was 4s 8d per 1,000 ft., a total of 9s 10(1 per I,oooft. The by-produc-ts, tar, coke, etc., go to pay for repairs and incidental expenses. The report was adopted. „