COST OF POWER.

Taranaki Daily News, 23 September 1922, Page 6

COST OF POWER.

STANDARD RATE FIXED. GOVERNMENT’S PROPOSALS. (From Our Parliamentary /Reporter.) Mr. R. Masters (Stratford) asked in the House if it was the intention of the Government to charge to one Dominion hydro-electric capital account the cosr of the construction and installation of all schemes completed, in progress or projected; to charge all maintenance and working expenses to one account; and to charge a flat rate all over the Dominion for power supplied, so that irrespective of the cost of any scheme in any particular locality, users in that locality would obtain their power at the same rate as users in any other part of New Zealand. The Hon. Mr. Coates said the question was undoubtedly not one of urgency, but there was no secret as to the attitude of the Government or the Department. There was a standard Government rate arranged which hud been issued. and printed. To say that the Government would stand by these rates all over New Zealand indefinitely would be to make a wrong suggestion. All the Government reqxiired was to make a net profit over expenditure. In fact so long as expenses, interest, and depreciation were provided for, they would not want to make a profit, and if they did make a profit it would result in a reduction in price to those taking the power. An hon. member: Will there be a flat rate? Mr. Coates: There will be the standard rate—l suppose you may call it a flat rate. It will be the same all over New Zealand. I do not say we shall rigidly stick to the rate, because it may be necessary sometimes to reduce rates in the case of schemes that have been successful. Proper accounts would be kept of each supply. There would be a separate account for each production plant. A flat rate had nothing very much to boast about as yet. ’ It was not paying depreciation, (Hofl- members: Oh! Oh!) It was->Qfl^r > paying the net income over expenditure. He believed, however, that it would pay very well and so would the other scheme. It was only a question of time. Mr. Isitt said they had heard information that was very startling to some of them in the South. Was it meant to override existing permanent contracts? Mr. Coates: What permanent contracts does the hon. member refer to? Mr. Isitt was understood to say he referred to the contract the Christchurch City Council had made with those using the Coleridge supply. Mr. Coates replied that the,Government contract with the city o* Christchurch did not run till 1925 or —he could not say from memory—and the Christchurch City Council would then have to nay the standard rates. Mr. Isitt: Then they would have to break their terms with their customers or lose money. Mr. Coates: I don’t know about that, but I know that Christchurch has accumulated profits of from £28.000 to £30,000, while we have accumulated losses amounting to £72,000 (general laughter). It was never- intended that profits should be made by any city council.