PARLIAMENT.

Patea Mail, 23 August 1881, Page 4

PARLIAMENT.

STOPPAGE OP NEW PLYMOUTH HARBOR WORKS. COMMISSION APPOINTED. In the House of Representatives on Friday nigfit, on consideration of the report of the Committee on the New Plymouth Harbor Works, Mr Wright said bis attention had been drawn to the magnitude of this scheme by reading a report of Sir John Goode’s on it. This report was only recently published, after being buried in official pigeon holes for nearly two years. The idea which had led to the work being santioned seemed to be the colonial necessity for a harbor of refuge there. Sir John Goode’s report, and all the evidence shewed that no such harbor was necessary there, or would be of use except for small coasters. The harbor of Kawhai, only 60 miles north of New Plymouth, was the best harbor on the West Coast of New Zealand, and would, he was convinced, be open to vessels, before the New Plymouth works could be obtained. The idea of a central penal establishment at New Ply- ; mouth had also been urged as an argument, .but as the works loan, and endowment were authorised the people of New Ply- • mouth objected to it, and it was abandoned. Sir John, Coode in bis design evidently contemplated the employment of convict labour. Both Waitara and Opunaki were, ho held, more* convenient ports than New Plymouth could be made. After reviewing the whole case, he moved, That this House approves of the recommendations contained in the report, and requests the Government to bring in a Bill this session to give effect thereto. Mr Kelly ridiculed the idea of Kawhai ever being available as a harbour of refuge, and said Mr Wright’s speech and the report of the Committee showed utter ignorance of the facts of the case and the localityi. Both were full of errors. He proceeded at considerable length to point this out, and complained that the Com .fnittee’s inquiry had not been fairly conducted. He contended that the funds at their disposal were sufficient to enable the works to be completed to an extent sufficient to attain the object in view. He disputed the correctness of the calculations as to the cost of the work, etc., made by the Committee. He hoped the House would not agree to the motion. The Premier thought the House would . not be justified in taking definite action with the information before it, but a case had been made out for inquiry, and he would move as an amendment, That a -Parliamentary Commission be appointed by Act to inquire into and report on the New Plymouth Harbor scheme, as’to its ■ utility and practicability, as to its financial position and prospects, and as to the fairness of rating equally or.otherwise all . lauds included in the present rating district. The Commission lo have full power to stop all expenditure on the present harbor works. Mr Fulton supported the report, and - thought the remarks of Mr Kell)’ had been strongly in its favor, although certainly not so intended. Sir George Grey thought those who had settled in the district on the strength of what the House had authorised deserved consideration. They should act with great prudence and care before retracing their steps. The Premier’s proposal would meet the justice of the case. Sir William Fox concurred with Sir George Grey’s sensible and proper view of the case, and would support the Premier’s amendment as a fair and reasonable proposal, which would do justice to all parties. Such statements as those of the report Avere .calculated to shake faith in local . self-government, and he feared such cases were not exceptional. He knew of another Harbor Board which had spent £50,000 out of £BO,OOO not only without improving the harbor or river, but to their positive injury. Ho strongly condemned the action of the Taranaki Harbor Board in reference to its appointment of an engineer, and expenditure of money. - Even if the works were to be continued, their conduct could Hot any longer be safely entrusted to such a body as the Taranaki Harbor Board. He thought Mr Bees had shown great presumption in his correspondence with Sir John Coode. He would support the amendment. A long discussion ensued. Mr Ballance defended the Wanganui Harbor Board from certain imputations which he .considered had been pointed at it by Sir William Fox, although it had not been absolutely named.—Messrs Sheehan, Weston, Trimble, Hamlin, Swanson, Lundon, Richardson, Gisborne, Barron, McCaugjian, Shrimski, and Levestam all spoke on the motion.

Ultimately Mr DcLatour moved the omission of the last paragraph of Mr Hall’s amendment, and the substitution of the words, “ Providing that all expenditure on the harbor works should be stopped until the Commission had reported to Parliament, and the House had considered the report, except expenditure necessary to preserve the works from injury and secure the plant, such expenditure to be undertaken by Government and defrayed out of the money belonging to the Board.” He stated that the Committee and Government had agreed to this. Messrs Kelly, Trimble, and Seddon, protested against the works being thus hung up. The original motion was negatived on the voices, and Mr Hall’s amendment, as amended by Mr DeLatour, was agreed to. The effect of the resolution thus adopted is that the harbor works must be stopped until a Commission has taken evidence and reported to ,the next Parliament.