MANAWATU-OROUA RIVER BOARD SCHEME.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3635, 7 May 1927, Page 4

MANAWATU-OROUA RIVER BOARD SCHEME.

SECTIONAL WORK UNDER CONSIDERATION. RECLASSIFICATION OF DISTRICT. As a result of its failure to obtain a grant from the Government, the Manawatu-Oroua River Board is now considering proceeding with a portion of the complete scheme of flood protection in order to convince the Government of the efficacy thereof.

At a meeting of the 'ManawatuOroua River Board held in Palmerston North on Thursday,' the chairman (Mr. W. S. Carter) introduced the subject of the flood protection proposals, stating that when the board interviewed the Prime Minister it had expected to receive, a grant. In this, ho’wever, it had beenunsuccessful, and the board had now to consider Avhether it should continue with its work or go into recess. In regard to 'finance, if the board met all its liabilities and collected all its rates it would be about square, so long as no further expenditure was undertaken. It was practically an impossibility to avoid doing this, however, unless the board went right out of existence, and such a course, at the present time, would seem unwise. If the board was going to strike any further rate the chairman thought that the board’s district should be reclassified, which would be an expense pf about £SOO. The question was whether the board should go on and; place the position before the Government for the purpose of obtaining assistance. If reclassification was properly carried out it would be a good thing for the district.

“We have reached the stage now where if we go on without taking some definite step we are just wasting time,” remarked the speaker. He went on to say that the Minister of Public Works had said lie would be pleased to look over the district, although the Prime Minister‘had intimated that he would be unable to do so himself. The chairman was confident that when the district was subjected to another big flood there would be a lot of people looking to the board to see what action it would take. Many wanted something to be done without any cost to themselves. It rested with the board as to what was to be done. Mr. R. Tanner pointed out that the board could do nothing with the scheme without a grant from the Government.

The chairman said that in that case banking would be done —he would bank himself. However, if only the ratepayers would compare their share of the cost with flood damage, they would support the scheme wholeheartedly. If the ratepayers paid £1 an acre they would be better off, and have security besides. There had been meetings in the district protesting against the scheme, yet some of the livest business men of Palmerston North had said that if the town paid as a contribution even £30,000, it would be on “a good wicket.” It had been admitted in other centres that the commission’s allocations were mere bagatelles as compared with the benefits to be derived. Mr. Tanner: What if the scheme costs fifty per cent, more than we estimate —where would we be? ' The chairman: In a very awkward position, but we are as secure as .humanly possible. He remarked later that the board had spent £lO,000, and he would be very sorry to see that sum carried away. j Mr. Tanner asked why the first section could not be carried out first, stating that the people were afraid that the cost of the comprehensive scheme might be even a million pounds. The chairman’s reply was that the opinion of the engineers had been against such a course. Mr. A. Seifert said that if the matter was to come before Parliament next session, the board must keep moving. It was the duty of the board to ascertain whether or not the ratepayers desired the scheme to be proceeded with. The chairman stated that that was exactly his feeling in the matter. Mr. Seifert suggested that a special meeting be called to consider going on with a /portion of the scheme. The chairman said that if the preliminary cut were carried out, the board could then go to the Government for assistance with the remainder. Mr. B. G. Gower observed that that would mean having to raise several loans in succession to prosecute the work, and when one set of ratepayers had had their land protected, (hey might vote against the following loan proposals. Mr. Tanner said that if the first cut proved a success, he was confident the position would be satisfactory for further work. The matter of rating would have to be considered. It was eventually decided to hold a special meeting on May 18 to consider the matter of going, on with the first part of the scheme at the mouth of the Manawatu and Oroua •layers, and of discussing Uie scheme ip all its aspects, with a view to pptimg the matter before t},,. Government apt] the ratepayers. • •