Critics Answered by Power Board

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 592, 19 February 1929, Page 12

Critics Answered by Power Board

OUTSPOKEN REPLIES SPENDING OF RESERVES The Auckland Electric-Power Board spent an hour yesterday afternoon in making outspoken and very condemnatory* replies to criticisms, Mr. A. G. Lunn. of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce, Dr. E. P. Neale, secretary of the chamber, and various people met by the board at Manurewa, coming under comment. In particular, the board adopted ;t reply to Mr. Lunn, who implied in a statement at the annual meeting of the chamber that the board should have been spending its reserves for extensions, instead of using £ 50.009 for buildings in Queen Street. DISPOSAL OF RESERVES “To spend its reserves in developing business has been the policy of the board since its inception,” remarked Mr. W. J. Holdsworth, chili rman, in a statement adopted by the board. “During the first year of the board’s operations, long and serious consideration was given to the Queen Street offices, as some of tlie members thought that central offices should be erected at once. Wiser counsel prevailed, and it was decided to erect accommodation on the board’s property facing King’s wharf station, with the understanding that on the completion of Arapuni larger and more central offices should be erected. “With this end in view, every year a portion of our reserves has been set aside and earmarked for our newbuilding. “The balance of reserve funds has been reinvested each year in the business, and up to March 31, J92s. amounts had beep allocated as follow: General reticulation in suburban areas, £149,770; machinery for power station. £8,490: office accommodation in suburbs, C 1,993: residence f**r emergency staff, £5.130: Queen Street offices. £14,903 —total, £180,286. SOUND FINANCING “Tliis method of finance is sound, as there will be a distinct saving of interest and sinking fund amounting to 8 per cent, per annum. However, whether the building is financed from reserves or loan money is not of great moment. The point is that, from the board’s standpoint, the building is an absolute necessity. When the board took over the undertaking from the City Council in 1922, there were 9,009 consumers on the books. Even with this number, it was found that the situation of the office was inconvenient, and the complaints made by the board’s consumers were many. “To-day, with 46,000 consumers to cater for, the position is becoming acLite. With this ever-increasing number of consumers, the staff has grown in proportion, and from tliis aspect alone increased accommodation is needed. “The criticism against power boards competing with private enterprise docs not apply to the Auckland Power Board, which from its inception lias avoided trading, and has co-operated and worked with the electrical trading concerns in its area in a most harmonious manner. “The ratepayers of Auckland can rest . assured that their interests will be safeguarded in the future, as it has been the policy of the board to do this since its inception.” NOT A PENNY FROM LOAN Mr. S. T. Crookes: The development of tlie scheme has been at tlie demand of the public, and this opposition i: amazing. He. severely criticised statements made by Dr. E. P. Neale, Who had stated that representations had been made to the board against building in Queen Street. “Not a single penny of the loan is for the new building, and Dr. Neale should know better than to suggest that it is,” commented Mr. Crookes. Mr. R. IT. Bartley, general manager, said Mr. Lunn had told him the position had been wrongly presented. He (Mr. Lunn) was not opposed to the loan. Mr. M. J. Bennett: It looks as if Mr. Lunn is realising that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Copies of the chairman’s statement are to be forwarded to Messrs. Lunn and Neale. MANUREWA CRITICISM Several members of the board commented on statements made to the board by Mr. J. Ferguson and Dr. Campbell- Jenkins at Manurewa, when the board visited the area last Thursday. “The trouble is that these two overstepped themselves,” remarked Mr. Holdsworth. “I find that, contrary to their assertions, the question of reticulating Brown’s Road has been inquired into fully on no fewer than three occasions. We asked for a guarantee of 8 per cent, on capital cost in place of the 20 per cent, we are entitled to require, and it was absolutely refused. Hence tlie road, which has two consumers. has not been reticulated.” “All the rest of the people we saw seemed very satisfied,” remarked Mr. Holdsworth in conclusion.