The Sun 42 Wyndham Street, Auckland, N.Z. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1927. A BIG LOSS ON ARAPUNI

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 195, 7 November 1927, Page 8

The Sun 42 Wyndham Street, Auckland, N.Z. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1927. A BIG LOSS ON ARAPUNI

THE Prime Minister has confirmed the assertion of the legal adviser to the English contractors for the construction of the Arapuni hydro-electric works that “somebody has got to lose an enormous amount of money over the whole scheme. In the opinion of the Rt. Hon. Edward Shortt, K.C., the sum to he lost was set down at about £1,000,000. It may be noted, however, that the Right Hon. J. G. Coates has not put a figure to the prospective loss, but has been content to admit tluit, beyond doubt, “the loss is going to he a heavy one for the Government.” Whatever else may he said about the extravagant enterprise, it is at least satisfactory to know that the Government is willing to do everything within reason, is even prepared, indeed, to go beyond a reasonable limit of compromise in order to make an end to the unfortunate deadlock over the power-house site, thus avoiding expensive litigation and protracted delay on the completion of the works at Arapuni. Though the loss of a large sum of public money is to be deplored the community generally will applaud the Government’s wise decision to meet the contractors rather more than halfway in an extraordinarily difficult situation. The question of responsibility for the obscure cause of the deadlock is not one for laymen to settle, but it is at least obvious to everybody that the circumstances, in their vex - y nature, demand a compromise, with, an exercise of reason and fairness on both sides. If the dispute were turned over to lawyers and expert arbitrators for settlement, the work of construction would be held up for a longtime and, in the end, somebody would have to pay a stiff price for the litigation, to say nothing at all about the necessary expenditure on finishing the contract. Litigation might determine the degree and allotment of responsibility for what is underneath the power-house site, but the taxpayers would have to meet the bill for the elaborate structure of argument above it. It was essential that the Prime Minister should he prudent and guarded in making a statement to Parliament and the country about the regrettable business, hut there were enough chinks in the armour of his reticence to reveal the appreciable fact that the Government is honest in its desire to avoid unfairness to the harassed contractors and to speed np the completion of the Dominion’s biggest contract. Thus, in seeking through compromise a quick way out of an embarrassing difficulty the Government deserves the support of the country. It is to be hoped that the negotiations for an amicable settlement of the dispute will achieve success. The Prime Minister has pointed out that, while the onus was on the contractors to carry out the contract, the Government would not be mean, one-sided or petty. At the same time, it was not the intention of the Government to he flabby and accept dictated terms. This, surely, is a reasonable attitude to adopt, and if it also be taken up in the same spirit of reasonableness by the contractors there should be little, further delay on the job. Litigation on “an unknown quantity” is, when the State is involved, a profligate luxury.