FLOOD CONTROL SCHEME.

Manawatu Herald, Volume LI, Issue 4520, 21 October 1930, Page 3

FLOOD CONTROL SCHEME.

4 DEPUTATION WAITS UPON GOVERNMENT. ASKS POP AtBODITION OP BOARD. AND WITHDRAWAL OP ■ SUBSIDY. —MINISTER REPUSES REQUESTS. Wellington, Last Night. Opposition to the ManawatuOrona River Board’s scheme for diverting the Manawatu river for the purpose of preventing Hooding Avas expressed by a deputation of. ratepayers which waited on the Acting-Prime Minister (lion. E. A. Ransom) to-day. The deputation asked the Government to withdraw its subsidy to the scheme, 'but Mir. Ransom in reply said that the Government's promise had been given as the result of Jong agitation, and that it could not be broken as the result of one deputation. The ratepayers, could express their approval or disapproval of the scheme when a poll on the proposed loan was taken. In introducing the deputation, Mr. J. Linlldater, At.lb, said that tlie deputation represented the whole of tlie ratepayers and avus asking the Government to prevent the ManaAvatu-Olroua River Board from proceeding with the drainage scheme. The modified scheme, as proposed by the hoard, Avould cost £320,000, and of this £220,000 avoulcl have to be found by the ratepayers. The ratepayers had been astonished at the amount, and noAV asked the Government to AvithdraAV its £IOO,OOO subsidy. Mr. jVI. A. Eliott said they claimed to represent every ratepayer in the Kairanga sub-division and were strongly opposed to the scheme, AVfiieh they considered impracticable and not Avorthy of consideration. However, the. board seemed to be determined to go on with tlie scheme, and the settlers viewed the position with alarm. They felt that, in view of the serious financial position of the country, the Government would be justified in withdrawing its subsidy. The board had misrepresented the position to the Government. Mi 1 Ransom: “What do you mean by misrepresentation?” Mr. Eliott: “I will point that out.” He said that the advantages did not Avarrant the expenditure, and there was no certainty that it would be a success. In the event of failure the increase i'ti rates would be disastrous to the Ratepayers. In schemes of this nature the engineers’ estimates were generally considerably exceeded. The 1.920 commission had stated that in order to produce a betterment of £5 2->er acre, £450,1)00 iwoutd have to be spent, and now the board stated that this could he produced for £247,000, but that there avas no guarantee of complete immunity from Hooding, or that they would have good drainage. In the Kairanga sub-division the rates would be inctreused by as much as 80 per cent. The board had also imAvarrantedly disfranchised 20 per cent, of the Kairanga sub-division and 50 per cent. ,of tlie Oroua subdivision, lby means of a re-classi-fication, but these people would still have to pay an administrative and maintenance rate and would also he liable to damage. It was unfair that these people should be deprived of a vote. The deputation also asked that it bo necessary for a tliree-fifths majority to carry the proposal, and that the river hoard be abolished. So far, the board had cost the ratepayers between £14,000 and £15,000 in administrative costs, 'and not one penny had begn spent for tlie benefit of the farmers. The board in ten years had done nothing. If the board were abolished, other local bodies would be able to lielp the settlers by building stop-banks. At the present time the river board had sole control. He maintained that the' board itself was not unanimous on the scheme.

Mr. Cliry stall said that on 22,- /■ 000 acres there would he a rating oil about 8/- iper acre, which would be too heavy a burden on the owners. The scheme would s,o ail'eet Poxton harbour' that it would mean the end of I’ox ton as a port. It would also mean the end of the ilax industry, as the flax owners maintained that unless their land was Hooded their flax would . die. The Moutoa estate, near h’oxton, had 2000 acres of beautiful flax which gave employment for 200 families, and it was well-known that an area under flax gave three times the employment that an equal area under grass gave. It had been said that the scheme would bring 70,000 acres into close settlement. The Minister of Public Works (Hon. W- B. Taverner) : “Is the classification on the benefits to be received 1 ?” t Mr. Elliott: “Yes; on the betterment.” Mr. Hansom said that after the Government had tried to meet the wishes of the people of the Manawatu it now found that a section of the people were opposed to the scheme. A voice: “We have been opposed to it for a long time.” Mr. Hansom: “You have kept very quiet, then.” The Acting-Prime Minister said that the Government could not withdraw its support on the representations of one deputation. He had visited the district on two occasions and had not hpard any opposition to the scheme. However, if the scheme was not sound the ratepayers could turn it down when the poll was taken. Those who had been born in the district or had lived in it for many years should know the requirements of the dis-

friet and should not lmve any’ difficulty in convincing I lie others. The representations for the scheme bad been made for a number of’ years and the Government could not. Aviilnlraw its subsidy at Ibis stage. It bad been suggested that the Government Avould be justified in withholding the money because of the financial stress, but it bad to be remembered that tlie Government- bad to find work for the unemployed, and that it considered that this worlc, as it made for the improvement, of the district, would be more economical than sonic of the jobs that were being put in band. Tie could not agree to a variation in the majority that was needed to curry the poll, nor to the elimination of the board, ihc proposals of t-lie deputation seemed to be very sweeping indeed, and they, seemed to be asking itiie Government to accept a responsibility that was their own. The matter was in their oavu hands, and it was for them lo convince the ratepayers that the scheme was not in their interests.