ATTITUDE TO BRIDGE

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 581, 6 February 1929, Page 16

ATTITUDE TO BRIDGE

HARBOUR BOARD NOT HOSTILE ERRONEOUS IMPRESSION Discussion about the attitude to be adopted to the harbour bridge lasted for half an hour at the meeting of the Harbour Board yesterday. The chairman, Mr. H. R. Mackenzie, reported that a deputation from the Auckland Harbour Bridge Association had waited on him, in order to ascertain the board’s attitude to tiie expenditure of the' £SOO voted by the Government for the survey of the site of the bridge. “Various speakers advocated the adoption of the site from Freeman’s Bay Reclamation to Shoal Bay, and I explained the board’s objections to that site on the ground of interference with navigation,” he said. “Mr. Alex. Harris stated that he had asked the Prime Minister to convene a conference of the parties concerned; but I pointed out that, in my opinion, the proper course was to ask that a royal commission or other competent tribunal be set up to take evidence and fix the site, type and height of the bridge. The association thought that a royal commission might be a costly matter, and suggested a Government departmental inquiry, and I told them that I would place the suggestion before the board at its first meeting at the same time emphasising that the board was not prepared to bear any part of the cost of such inquiry.” “MISAPPREHENSION" Mr. T. B. Clay, moving that the report should be adopted, said that the public had got an erroneous idea of the board’s attitude. It was believed that the board was opposed to the bridge, and members believed that the particular site suggested was an unwise one. A Member: Where do you get. that from? That is not correct. Continuing, Mr. Clay said that he, for one, was not opposed to the scheme, provided it would not interfere with navigation. Mr. E. W. Inder said that the Press reports seemed to indicate that the board objected to the site. No resolution had been passed, and no expression of opinion been given on any site. The attitude taken up had been that the question of cost of survey and site should be gone into by a properly constituted body. The board had never gone any further, and had not decided not to pay a portion of the cost of the inquiry. The Chairman, Mr. H. R. Mackenzie: The board decided that. Mr. C. G. Macindoe: The board has decided a lot that Mr. Inder is not aware of. “The bsard is not likely to run into a loss of £4,000 or £5,000 in revenue on the reclaimed land by consenting to the suggested site,” said the chairman. Mr. Macindoe said that the commission should make the decision about the site, which should be in the best interests of the people on both shores. He had always thought that a subterranean passage under the harbour would fill the bill. Mr. Campbell Johnstone said that the board would have to be certain that the bridge was not going to cause scouring and a silting up along the wharves. “We are not committed to a resolution, but are quite untrammelled,” said Mr. J. B. Johnston. COST OF INQUIRY After the report had been adopted, the question was raised as to whethei* or not the board had committed itself to an inquiry. “You have recommended a depart-

mental inquiry, and I can’t see how you can avoid paying part of the cost,” said Mr. T. Bloodworth. The chairman explained that he had told the deputation that the board would not object to a departmental inquiry. tie had also said that it would be much better to come to a decision about the site than to spend the £SOO and waste it. Mr. W. F. McCallum: Why did you say that? ‘‘Because 1 am satisfied that there are enough members who would not let the £ 5,000 revenue be lost,” replied the chairman. The suggestion was then put forward that the report should be merely received and that no expression of opinion on the departmental inquiry should be givejj. “We are here to watch the interests of the Harbour Board, and at the present time I would like to see the board quite aloof from the Bridge Committee or an inquiry,” said Mr. Hutchinson. Finally, the report was received.