Manawatu Herald THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1926. BOROUGH AND RIVERS BOARD COMMISSION.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3049, 17 June 1926, Page 2

Manawatu Herald THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1926. BOROUGH AND RIVERS BOARD COMMISSION.

IT will not be sufficient for the Borough Council to merely inform the chairman of the Commission, (set up to apportion the proportion of cost, if any, of the ManawatuOroua River Board’s scheme between the various local bodies) that it “refuses to be saddled with any expenditure.” Good and sufficient reasons will have to be advanced by the Council in support of such a bald or negative statement. The Council would be well advised, therefore, to lose no time in giving serious consideration to the subject as it concerns the borough, for consideration by the Commission. Looking at the scheme from a district rather than a local pointof view, it cannot be denied that the proposal to give a straight outflow to the tortuous windings of the Manawatu river would be of incalculable benefit to approximately (50,000 acres of some of the most fertile and productive land in the Dominion, now subject to periodical inundation. The reclamation ol this land would undoubtedly promote increased population and productivity, as a result of which all the towns bordering on the. area would benefit either directly or indirectly. In this connection Foxton would not benefit to the same extent as Palmerston North (we presume the latter is cited as a proposed contributory authority). It naturally follows that those who are to reap a direct benefit i.e., the land-owners, will pay in greater proportion. The point is: In what manner will the scheme benefit Foxton other than in the indirect nature indicated above? At present no land within the borough area is affected by flood waters. Since banking operations have taken place on the eastern side of the river at M'outoa, however, it is possible, in the event of an “old man” flood, that the waters may spill over near No. 1 Line and llow into the town. This, of course, is only problematical. The Board’s proposed cut, about a mile upriver from the wharf would, therefore, remove such a threatened menance. On the other hand the cut would render the present wharf useless for shipping and may possibly necessitate the removal- of the flaxmills on the river bank to a location outside the borough area. Would the removal of the wharf and shipping from the borough be beneficial or otherwise to local tradespeople? It is contended that the .proposed “cut” would improve flic channel and increase shipping, but that is a matter which more directly concerns the Harbour Board. Now that the Borough Council has been cited it must place i(s case fully and clearly before the Commission by a capable advocate, otherwise it must pul up with a finding which may prove an unfair burden upon the ratepayers.