RIVERS BOARDS’ SCHEME.

Manawatu Herald, Volume L, Issue 3965, 6 July 1929, Page 2

RIVERS BOARDS’ SCHEME.

OBJECTORS DEPUTATTONISE MINISTER. ' “BOARD HAS LOST CONFIDENCE OF RATEPAYERS.” Wellington, Last Night. The s'chetme proposed 'by the Ma-nawatu-Oroua River Board with the object of preventing floods in the district has formed a subject of controversy for some years past, and many deputations, for and against thev proposal, have interviewed the Government. To-day yet another deputation approached the Minister of Internal Affairs (the Hon. P. A. de la Perrelle) on the subject, the deputation being composed of members of the Manawatu Ratepayers’ Association. The deputation opposed the scheme suggested by the River Board, and urged that the Government should reflrain from mating any contribution to the cost. The Minister proimised to discuss the question witlv the Minister of Public Worts (the Hon. E. A. Ransom). 1 Ah’. A. Guy mentioned that there were already two petitions before the Government, one urging that the Manawatu-Oroua River Boar d should be abolished, and the other, signed by one half of the ratepayers .in the district, asking that the Go-

vernment should make no grant-in-aid. Five out of ten of the local bodies interested had declined to support the scheme, and the Palmerston North Borough Council had given its support only on the condition that no contribution towards the cost was expected. There had been practically no loss of stock as the result of floods during the past thirty or forty years. Mir. Guy also pointed out that the scheme was the idea, of only one engineer, and the. members of the deputation thought that before such a gigantic scheme was undertaken further opinions should ihe obtained. In view of the fact that half of the ratepayers were against the sebetme would mean that the River Board would not be able to carry the- loan of £150,000, which was half of the estimated cost of the work.

Mr H. Voss pointed -out that the area involved in the scheme was one of 70,000 acres, and only onethird of that area, was subject to floods to any extent. He bad been in the district foir very many years and he had never known of any great damage being done by floods. Air J. Chrystall, in opposing the River Board’s scheme, said that the Roll'd had lost the confidence of the ratepayers. During the time it had been in existence it had spent £12,000 of the ratepayers’ money, and had not done one half-penny worth of good. Ratepayers in the district could not afford to pay for the work, and lie suggested that the Public Woflks Department might undertake some scheime and charge the ratepayers only what they could afford to pay, the Government finding the remainder. The Minister: Then you agree that there is need foir some scheme?

AD 'Chrystall: The matter could he inquired into by 'the Public Works Department. We don’t want the River Board’s scheme, and we don’t want the work to be carried out by the Board. In replying to the deputation, the Alinister outlined i t'he history of the proposals, and said it was apparently agreed that some scheme was essential. Personally, he would not be in favour of the Government carrying out the scheme, as the settlers who received the benefit should be called upon to contribute to the cost. He would take an early opportunity of discussing the matter with the Alinister of Public Works and with the officers of his department.