RIVERS CONTROL

Wairarapa Times-Age, 19 September 1941, Page 7

RIVERS CONTROL

BILL PASSED BY HOUSE KEEN COMMITTEE DEBATE. REPRESENTATION & RATING ISSUES. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, This Day. After a full day’s discussion in the Committee stage, the Soil Conservation and Rivers Control Bill was passed last night by the House. The major discussion was on clause 3, which sets cut the constitution and personnel ol the control council, and an Opposition amendment aimed at giving a preponderance of local body representation was defeated. Various clauses dealing with rating were also discussed at length by the Opposition. No alterations to the Bill were made in committee. "This is a very ambitious measure which cannot be put into operation without' inflicting hardship on certain sections and individuals of the community,” said Mr Polson (Opposition, Stratford), opening the discussion on the short title. The Opposition said it was going to be an impossible task in a country with the geological formation of New Zealand to handle effectively the sheet erosion which took place in the high country. If that problem were to be handled the land would have to be restored to bush condition. He criticised the proposed council. It was without representatives of the local bodies and the primary producers and the Minister was entitled to make any appointment he liked. He asked that provision should be made for appeals against the decisions of the council, and for compensation for land taken or damaged by the council and for the right of appeal on compensation decisions. He advocated elective catchment boards, with experts as associate members only. REHABILITATION .MEASURE. Mr Frost (Government, New Plymouth) predicted that the time would come when the Bill would have to be amended to deal also with sea erosion. ‘‘Though the point has not been stressed either in this House or outside, this Bill is a rehabilitation measure,” he said: "It opens up opportunities for the returning men to do serviceable work of inestimable value.” Mr Broadfoot (Opposition, Waitomo): “How is it going to be done?” Mr Frost replied that the funds would be provided and the Government would see that the work was carried out. The Minister of Public Works, Mr Armstrong, said that if the Bill dealt with rivers alone it could not cope with the difficulty, much of which was .caused by erosion in the high country. Answering Mr Polson, he said local residents would have a majority on catchment boards, and local bodies would have the right to nominate those they wanted on the controly council, which was to be appointed in exactly the same way as councils had been appointed by every past Government. He would not appoint any local body representatives unless they were approved by the local bodies. CONSTITUTION OF COUNCIL. Intimating that he intended to move later for wider representation on the council. Mr Massey (Opposition. Franklin) said that the Bill would not be worth much unless the wholehearted co-operation of local bodies was gained. Men experienced in the problems should be on the council and he suggested that representatives of the .Counties’ Association, the drainage and river boards and farmers’ interests should be appointed. Mr Coates (Opposition, Kaipara) said there was a principle in the Bill that was wrong, and that was that another rating authority was being created. Where a rating authority was created when one was already in existence, one of them should be eliminated. Mr Armstrong: “It is not another rating authority. It is one to take the place of a multiplicity of authorities." The Minister of Railways. Mr Semple, said the Bill was not a “rush" Bill. The principles of it had been under consideration by Public Works engineers for many years. They were tackling a job they had never tackled before and it was natural that some of the clauses of the Bill would call for amendment later on, but that could only be decided after the principles had been put into operation. Mr Kidd (Opposition, Waitaki) said he considered that local bodies should be given more representation on the council and that, in particular the back country farmers should be represented. He emphasised that the task under the Bill was a national one and said that instead of another rating authority being set up the Government should make the job a national one paid for by Government money out of taxation. Mr O'Brien (Government, Westland) said that a council of six was considered by the select committee to be the most workable proposition it could devise. The only way to get the work done was to have a small body of carefully selected men administering the proposals. There had been no great objection to the Bill as a whole. The committee had gone through every clause with a fine-tooth comb and felt that the Bill could not be further improved. Mr Polson said he believed that all the difficulties would be ironed out if local bodies and farmers were satisfied that the council that would administer the proposals in the Bill was a council in which they could repose complete confidence. If the Government made a concession to satisfy them in this respect, objection to clauses which at present aroused apprehension and distrust would, he believed, go by the board. AMENDMENT RULED OUT. Mr Massey said that the Bill provided for a council of six, three nominated by the Government and three by the local authorities, and gave the council power to impose an additional rating burden on the local bodies and the farming community, Large areas of land were already‘going out of occupation because the tenants were over-taxed and could not meet the charges loaded against , them. If the farming community were given more representation on the council, the Opposition would be pleased to assist in putting the Bill into operation. He moved an amendment to the effect that, instead of two persons being appointed by the Governor-General on the recommendation of the Minister, as representing the local authorities, three persons should be appointed on the recommendation of the Counties’ Association. The Prime Minister, Mr Fraser, having raised a point of order, the chairman of committees, Mr McKeen, ruled

the amendment out of order on the ground that it would increase the expenditure of the Crown. Later, Mr Massey moved a further amendment that Public Works Department representation should be reduced from two to one, making the council membership five instead of six. Mr Armstrong said that the local bodies had stressed the need for experienced men on the council, yet the member for Franklin proposed that an engineer, who would probably be one of the most experienced men, should be struck off. MATTER FOR ENGINEERS. Mr Semple said that laymen had been tinkering with the erosion problem for years, but the solution was a matter for engineers. The amendmen. proposed to take away one of the engineers and leave control in the hands of laymen. The ■ amendment was defeated by 38 votes to 18, Clauses were passed rapidly through the Committee stage till clause 84, which authorises administrative rates to be levied on all rateable property within the meaning of the Rating Act was reached. Mr Polson asked whj the unfortunate landowner should have to pay the whole of the charges for work of general benefit. Mr O'Brien said Mr Polson was asking the State to pay the rate and then find nearly all the money for the works to be carried out. In some cases the State would have to find up to 8( per cent of the cost. The remainder of the 169 clause, were rapidly disposed of, the Bill being read a third time and passed by 1C p.m.. when the House adjourned.