MANAWATU RIVER DRAINAGE SCHEME.

Shannon News, 18 February 1927, Page 4

MANAWATU RIVER DRAINAGE SCHEME.

VIEWS OP HOROWHENUA COUNTY COUNCIL.

.CHAIEMAN INSTRUCTED TO OPPOSE ALLOCATION.

The findings of the Royal Commission which sat to consider the Manawatu River diversion scheme were freely discussed by the Horowhenua County Council on Saturday, and the chairman (Cr. G. A. Monk) was appointed to represent the Council at a meeting of the contributing bodies to be held in Palmerston and to enter this Council's protest against the proposed allocation of a capital levy of £5844 on the County. The Department of Internal Affairs forwarded copies of the reports of the three commissions which inquired into the Manawatu-Oroua River Board's operations. On the motion of the chair, man, seconded by Cr. McLeavey they were received.

Mr. R. H. Spencer, clerk of the Slug-, gish River Drainage Board, wrote stating that at a meeting of the Board on January 13th it was suggested that a conference of the contributing local bodies be held to protest against the contributions assessed; such conference to be convened by the Kairanga County Council. RATEPAYERS' MEETING.

Cr. Kilsby asked if any communication had been received from the ratepayers' meeting held at Palrherston.

The chairman: I saw a newspaper report, but it really would be beneath the dignity of the Council to take any notice of the utterances. Cr Barber: I understand the River Board is bringing up a report and probably the Council would like to peruse it.

The Chairman: We have a copy of the evidence taken and we have a copy of the report of the Commissions. Do you wish to go any further at this juncture with regard to taking any steps such as acting with the Manawatu Ratepayers' Association? There is a letter here from the Sluggish River Drainage Board. That represents the whole point, as to whether the Council wishes to be represented at any conference that may be called by the protesting bodies, and whether you feel that whoever you send should have a mandate from the Council as to what action to take. CHAIRMAN WISHES TO KNOW HIS POSITION. Cr McLeavey moved' that the Chairman be appointed to represent the Council. The Chairman: But what attitude am I to take. Cr McLeavey: You know the feeling of the Council. The Chairman: No, the feeling of the Council is pretty divided if you get to the bottom of it. Cr Kilsby: Is there anything in •that report that directly affects the Council? The Chairman: We are mulcted for £SBOO capital expenditure. In answer to a question by Cr Barber, the Chairman stated that the ratepayers of the whole County and not of a particular portion, had to find the money. Cr McLeavey: Perhaps the northern end could contribute something. The Chairman: They have to. They I have got their drainage authorities, 1 which are mulcted in very heavy findings. Cr McLeavey: As far as the southern end is concerned, I am against paying rates to that, and I am going to protest against it. Cr Barber: It is to be paid in instalments. Could we have some information about them? The Chairman: Yes. We are going to raise the money. We have authority to pay the interest and sinking fund on £6OOO oyer.the whole County. GENERAL FUND MIGHT BEAR THE COST. The Chairman said that the rate would only amount to some hundredths of a penny in the pound. It would be so small that the Council would probably pay interest and sinking fund out of the general fund and it would never be felt. Cr Jensen: It is the principle of putting this on to the ratepayers without taking a poll that we must protest against.

The Chairman: They have to get legislative authority, and they have not yet got it. Cr Jensen: If we take a poll of ratepayers we get their sanction; but when ; it is imposed without a poll that is the end of local government. Cr McLeavey: It is not fair. Cr Ryder stated that there was a certain amount of. this class of work being done to-day. The ratepayers in a section of Wanganui defeated a sewerage loan for £25,000, but the health authorities stepped in and put it through. Cr McLeavey: That is in the interests of public health. The Chairman asked if he was to be ordered to oppose the findings. Cr McLeavey: That is my motion. / Cr Eyder: If the Chairman wants another Councillor or the Clerk with him, we can send them. ' The Chairman: I have my own views on the matter, but I do not want to impose them on anybody, but to act on behalf of the Council. A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE. Cr Barber said that there were only two ridings really affected by the demand. If it had to be spread over the whole County it would raise trouble I

round the table. Aa the charge was only going to be a very small one, it was the principle that thJey were up against. He felt pretty certain that Tokomaru riding would be quite agreeable to accept a portion of the charge. The land in the Makerua area was of a fairly solid quality,,, and he thought it could stand a little more. He would move an amendment that the Chairman obtain the feeling of the meeting. The Chairman: You want me to remain neutral? Cr Barber: Before you decide, we really ought to have the views of this Council. The Chairman: I have to assume that if I go I have to protest. Cr Kilsby: If you don't go, you are in- favour of it, I imagine. . Cr Barber withdrew his amendment.' The Chairman said he hardly liked to go to the meeting without some instruction from the Council Cr McLeavey: You have it there. You have to go to the meeting to oppose the contributions as assessed. The Chairman: Does that mean to oppose them as a whole, or is there any modification? . LIABILITY OF NORTHERN DISTRICT. Cr McLeavey: I think the northern end should be called into the question. The Chairman: They are called in, outside of the County. The Buckley Drainage Board, the Makerua Drainage Board and the Manawatu-Oroua River Board are called into it. They cover the same land. There will be double contributions from the Makerua and Manawatu-Oroua Boards, which are on the same area, and the same applies to the Buckley Board. The Commission contends that the County, outside of those areas, will benefit by having that water taken away, making our roads dry. In the evidence which I gave before the Commission, I said that, whilst I recognised the benefit to the County as a whole, we had a set-off as we were providing a means of communication. I also said we had our own difficulties as far as flood-water was concerned. We have some large rivers to contend with. If you consider that £OOOO is an excessive assessment, your instructions must be that I am to oppose that assessment. Cr Kilsby: It is rather excessive if you take it as a whole. Taking the Drainage Boards, they have three rates over their property—their own drainage board rate, the ordinary county •rate, and now they will have the river board rate which it is proposed to strike over the whole County. .1 think that £6OOO is an excessive amount; but if they could eut it down by half it would be reasonable. The southern end of the County is considerably larger than the northern end, which is directly affected. It may be for only three or four days out of a whole year that the highways are closed. I think we should oppose that assessment. WORTH THE MONEY. The Chairman: You say the northern ridings are too heavily rated in certain areas. This idea is to relieve

I them by spreading it over the whole County. Will we get £450 per annum benefit from the fact of there being no water on the northern end of the County that is submerging the roads? I would contend that the fact of having a portion of the Manawatu bridge carried away 'was an effect of flood water. Is it not worth £450 a year to the County if you eliminate such risks? You will not have half the responsibility of the big bridge at the northern end, because the river is going into the Manawatu County, away from us. If the main highway is going to be kept open continuously, that is some benefit. The travelling to-day is by motor rather than by train. The Wirokino end was blocked for some weeks last year. Cr Ryder: I have got my own river troubles in the southern end, and I do not see that I should support that scheme; but if we are going to have the Manawatu river.and bridge shifted, that puts another aspect on it. The scheme will be a benefit to the district as a whole. That is a little gain to everybody and that aspect should be taken into consideration. I did) not know that the bridge was going to be shifted. The Chairman: If the river is shifted, the bridge must be shifted. Cr Kilsby: The bridge will be there, i The Chairman: Yes, but there will i not be any flood danger. "LEGISLATION BY COMMISSION" Cr Jensen: It is quite true that perhaps 4he County as a whole may benefit, but it is equally true that the northern end would not care whether any of the bridges at the southern end were washed away. We have to bear the burden if anything goes at our end. It is very dangerous if we allow legislation by a commission to impose heavy charges on local bodies.

The Chairman: This is not legislation but a recommendation to pass legislation on those lines. This is not mandatory, but only a recommendation. Cr Jensen: That is so; but I understand that in the past they could not charge a local body without a loan. The Chairman: Yes, if you have a bridge washed away, you can raise a loan without taking a poll. If it is a main road it can be spread over the whole County.

Cr Jensen: That was only brought in a year or so ago. The Otaki bridge was on a main road.

The Chairman: The whole of New Zealand built that, and rightly so. It was a main bridge on a main road. Or Jensen said it was pretty hard if

the Commission could draw a line and say to one set of ratepayers, "You must contribute," and to another, "You go free." If this was made a national affair they would have to contribute to it by taxation. The Chairman said there should be a national contribution. Cr Barber: It goes to show the fallacy of the riding method of treating , with a combined body. No. 9 Highways Council should have a voice in the matter. The Chairman: That is purely an advisory body and has <ao voice in taxation. A MAIN HIGHWAY. Cr Catley: Is this going to be a main I highway over the Shannon bridge to | the Foxton line? The Chairman: It is declared a main highway liow Cr Catley: What I object to is that we may have to pay without saying whether we like it or not. If there is a referendum I have the option of voting which way I like The Chairman: No doubt they will seek legislative authority to do away with the necessity of taking a poll because if they have to take a poll it is squashed The motion is that I be authorised to oppose the allocation made by the Commission The motion was carried and no dissentient vote was recorded CHAIRMAN EXPECTS BENEFIT TO COUNTY j In answer to a question by Cr Kilsby the Chairman said: "I go there just to oppose the allocation as made. In my own personal mind frankly speaking as far as this County is concerned I don't know but what the allocation will have some benefit. I would be a contributing ratepayer in the extreme southern end «f tie County."