TEKAPO POWER.

Timaru Herald, Volume XCVIII, 13 May 1925, Page 9

TEKAPO POWER.

Question Again Discussed.

MR ANGLAND’S MOTION LOST. At yesterday’s meeting of, the South Canterbury Power Board, Mr .VY. Angland proposed: — . . . “'That the secretary of this Board bj instructed to write to Messrs Armstrong, Whitworth and Co., Boving and Co, Vickers Ltd, and the National Electric Company, or any other firm approved by the Board, asking them to tender for the ©rection and construction of a hydroelectrical powo" station at Lake Tekapo, together with all the required equipment for generating 5000 h.p., each tenderer to supply his own plans and specifications; all tenders to be subject to the approval of the Government engineers, or to the approval of any engineer the Board might appoint. And further, the matter to be subject to the Board obtaining the consent of the ratepayers of South Canterbury and Timaru to a loan to carry out the work; all tenders to bo in the hands of the Board’s secretary within four months from date; the lowest or any tenderer not necessarily to be accepted.” The motion was seconded by Mr C. E. Kerr.

Mr Angland paid he moved the motion (1) on account of the unreliability of Coleridge, and the fact that there would not be a supply there sufficient to last South Canterbury and North Canterbury for more than four years; (2) because the Government had entered into a contract to supply the Christchurch City Counoil for twelve vearc, under which contract Christchurch would dominate the position and take all the power which could be generated at Coleridge; (3) by reason of,the statement by the Hon. J. G. Coates, when he declared at Monawai, that there would be a shortage of power in 3929-30, and that it was essential that some source of power should be obtained to supplement Coleridge. It was clear that South Canterbury could not depend on Coleridge power for more than four years, and it was the Board’s duty to look around for another source of supply. The Minister’s statement put the position beyond doubt. Their only hope was Tekapo. They had a report from Boving and Co., that it could be developed for £256,000, and an offer to dovelop it for that sum. They could get power from the source named as .cheaply as from Coleridge, and in time to come dt would be cheaper than Coleridge. It might be said that they should wait for the report of the Government engineers who were now at Lake Tekapo, but that would only be a waste of time. Thev should get tenders and then they would be in a position to act. There was no doubt but that the necessary loan would he carried, and Tekapo would for all time meet the needs of Tdmaru and South Canterbury. The motion should he carried unanimously. Mr Kerr said the motion was undoubtedly on right lines. It might be said that they would not get any tenders, but at the Mount Cook Hermitage a 200 h.p. plant had just been installed, and tenders for it had been called in the same way as it was now proposed to get them for Tekapo; and the Hora Hova scheme had been tendered for in a similar way. In this way the ratepayers would not be put to any expense. Boving’s report showed them that they had a wonderful scheme at Tekapo. _ The Power Board had now been in existence for 2£ years and had not done a great deal; in fact what they had done was very disappointing, anrl it had yet to be proved whether they were working on right lines. Thore was a very strong and sound reason why Levels County should not be. reticulated in the meantime. The whole district should he united and go in for Tekapo. If they failed to do this thev would be handicapped for all time. By getting all the available data they would be in a much better position than they were in at the present time, and would know how to act when the conference was held between the Board, the Public Works Department, and the Tekapo League. Mr J. R. Brace supported the motion. The people of Christchurch, ho said, were getting cheap power, and if South Canterbury people did not look out they would have to pay for the advantage which the Government had given to Christchurch. The Board should adopt a self-reliant policy, and not go in for piece meal work. The whole of South- Canterbury should be united, and if it was, and they called for tenders in the manner now proposed, thev would be doing the right thing. There- would be no loss to the ratepayers in calling for tenders. He understood that by the time the second tunnel was put in at Coleridge, North Canterbury would want all the power that could be developed there, and South Canterbury would be left lamenting. Christchurch p-Vmle had made a snlondid bargain with the Government —from their point of view —but South Canterbury would have to nav for it. If, on getting the tenders, thev were too higlii mono need be accented . Mr C. J. Talbot said there was another side to the story. It might seofti foolish to vote against the proposal, seeing that it would not commit them to anything, and they might get a lot of valuable information for nothing, but was it fair to ask firms to tender on that basis? Wherever tenders had been colled on the same system there had been a guarantee that one would be accepted, but in tbie cas9 there was no such guarantee, and it would not be honest to put contractors to ell the expense involved, and then not accept a tender. Then too, it was by no means certain that the loan would be carried; nor that the Government’s sanction would be obtained. They should first ascertain ' whether the Government would approve of the scheme being carried out by local enterprise. He was just as keen an advocate of Toknoo as anyone, and ho was convinced that it would come some day; but he coul<£ not approve of the motion. Something had been said about the district not being united, and lie would like to ask whose fault was that? Although they were reticulating the district pieco meal thev would be united sooner or later. Ho would oppose the motion because it wonVI not be honourable to call for tenders in such a way, and might be looked upon as a niece of ebook on the part of the Board. They should wait for the report of the Government ongineors who were now at Lake Tekapo. ■M'd they would then know hotter how to act.

Mr -T. C. South endorsed Mr Talbot’s remarks.

Mr S. I. Fitch said ho did not feel inclined to vote either way that day. The matter should havo been introduced by notice of motion, and members would then have had time to give it consideration. It did not seem right to rsk anyone to tender for such a big work on the conditions outlined in the motion. The matter was a very important one and might involve the Board in far-reaching consequences. Mr K. McKenzie said he felt the same as Mr Fitch in regard to the matter. While he did not like to vote against the motion, which was seeking information, ho did not- feel justified in voting for it. Government engineers were at present investigating the Tekapo scheme, and the Board should

await the result of those investigations; and when they had the Government report they would be in a position to discuss the matter from all angles at the conference between the Board, the Tekapo Leaguo, and the Public Works Department. He had a strong feeling that the Government would themselves develop Tekapo. They knew that Coleridge would all le wanted i>y North Canterbury in a few years, and there was need for another source of supply. Apart from theso considerations he doubted whether firms would tender under the conditions named in the motion. Ho was not against Tekapo, and believed it would come before long; in the meantime they had not a demand for a very big load in South _Canterbury, and ho must vote against the motion.

Mr G. Saunders said that tho matter had been in abeyance for a. long time now, and they could wait a little longer for the report of the Government engineers. Ho was as much in favour of Tekapo as ant’one. If tho Government handled it lie did not seo why South Canterbury should not net as much benefit from it ..s Christchurch had been allowed to get from tl;* Coleridge scheme. The time was not opportune for tho Board to take Tekapo in hand, and he would vote against the motion. The chairman (Mr J. Kennedy) said that he would say straight out that he was opposed t<> the motion, because be considered that it would lead theip nowhere. Tekapo was a good scheme, and would come shortly. In the meantime they were taking tho best course by reticulating the district, and thus, when it came they would be prepared for it. The Board wore working and not talking; and they had an assurance that more power would be supplied Inter on when they needed it. He was glad to hear the remarks concerning unitv, and hoped that soon they all would be united and working for the good of the whole community.. Mr Angland, in replying, said that the opponents of the motion were, bankrupt of arguments, and were evidently content to adopt a wait and see policy. On a vote being r.aken the motion was lost. Messrs Angland, Bruce, Kerr, and Mills voting for it, and the chairman and Messrs Talbot, South. McKenzie-, and Saunders against. Mr W. Dayman had had to leave to attend a meeting of the Harbour Board when the matter was being discussed, and Mr Fitch did not vote.