LOAN FOR DAM

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 539, 17 December 1928, Page 10

LOAN FOR DAM

HUIA’S PROBABLE COST MR. H. P. TAYLOR’S CHALLENGE Mr. H P. Taylor has written as follows to The Sun concerning- the waterworks loan of £200,000 whifch the City Council is applying to the Local Bodies Board to sanction: letter to the Auckland City Counuearedl?SCernber. 13 ’ mOSt ° f "'hidl appeoied m jour issue of that date, protesting against the council’s proposal to Ro«rH aC fo the L .°. cal Government Loans SnnAn° r sanction to borrow another £200,000 (making £700,000 in all) to 5i? ov. 0 v .® r Buia Dam expenditure and other waterworks extravagances, appears to XTn oj l - the counc il with bombshell effect at its special meeting last *nday. The gravamen of the resolution an , excu «o for borrowing this huge additional sum is as follows- ‘To raise loan of £200,000 for the development, extension, and improvement of waterworks of Auckland City, and acquisition of real and personal property therefor. Apart from the delicious touch imparted by the words ‘personal property, the foregoing resolution is as full of possibilities and loopholes for further wastage and loan moneys diversion as is a rabbit burrow of escape holes. “Judging from their remarks, councillors would have ratepayers believe that t.he £200,000 will be applied only to the Huia Dam, a work which the city engineer estimated would be completed for £489,000. The council has already borrowed and apparently spent £500,000 on this work, which at present is far from completion, and has also spent thereon approximately another £IOO,OOO either out of overdraft or district fund account, which on November 14 was in debit £34,081, to which they added, without details, IS days ago, another £116,891 of due but unstated accounts passed for and requiring payment forthwith. I omit for the present other substantial . sums (including £38,413 certified by Tramways, etc., Committee), also requiring payment as due accounts. The above collection of figures discloses the present serious condition of affairs financial at the Town Hall. A perusal of stated balances of other loan accounts as at November 14, taken in conjunction with liabilities accruing and to accrue in connection therewith, would be an eye-opener to every interested ratepayer.

“A halt must be called until the new council to be elected next May shall have had an opportunity of thoroughly and impartially investigating the wasteful expenditure by the present council of the vast sums entrusted to it.

“On Friday last, councillors did not disprove my Indictment that, with onethird only of the dam completed, the total cost at May 31 last aggregated the enormous sum of £414,000. Not a single councillor then ventured even a guess as to the total probable, cost of the dam when completed. They were even silent as to the approximate date of completion of the main dam.

“According to your report of the meeting, Cr. Entrican unconcernedly said ‘that the dam may cost £150,000 more than the original estimate’—a mere £150,000 is a matter of small moment to the Deputy-May or—and later he asserted it was well known that a ‘large’ sum was taken from waterworks account for Nihotupu in addition to the overexpenditure on the estimates. This financity drainage, on Cr. Entrican’s admission, may be an explanation why the council last July had to raise at a. higher interest rate another £107,000 without the ratepayers’ sanction, to make up a deficit of that amount in the £150,000 water loan, at a low interest rate, then due for payment. Cr. Entrican’s assurance lends weight to my forecast of December 13 that the Huia Dam cost will undoubtedly far exceed its original estimate of £489,000.

“Cr. Allum recognised the gravity of the position disclosed and reported by me to the Local Government Loans Board, and suggested that a public reply be made to my letter. I shall deal with that reply if and when made by some responsible council official. Meantime, I invite Cr. Allum to inform the ratepayers what amount has been expended by the council to date from any fund in furtherance of his scheme of bringing water from the Hunua. Manga tan gi, and Maungatawhiri, not forgetting the fee and expenses

of the engineer. Mr. IT. H. Dare, the Sydney expert, whose report dated September 24 last concludes with the warning that his estimate of £3.000.000 for the Hunua scheme is ‘tentative, and based upon very slender information, and on presentp ric-es.’ ”