HARBOURS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

Auckland Star, Volume XLI, Issue 162, 11 July 1910, Page 2

HARBOURS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

% ■ — »'" AUC"____ND HARBOUR BOARD'S : . ATTITUDE. OBJECTIONABLE CLAUSES. A special meeting of the Auckland Harbour Board was held to-day for the purpose of considering a number of clausein the Harbours Act Amendment Bill, recently circulated. There were present: Messrs. A. J. Entrican (chairman), J. B. Macfarlane, J. H. Gunson, J. M. Mennie, W. E. Hutchison, G. W. Basley, J. H. Bradney, W. J. Napier, A. lieyes, and Capt. McKenzie. In opening the proceedings the chairman thought that it was right they should meet and discuss one. or two clauses in the bill before it went through Parliament. In response to a telegram sent by him to the Hon. Mr. Millar, the following answer' had been received: "Anticipate bill will' be in committee stage this week, but impossible to stato which day." Mr. Napier objected to clause 39, touching leases of land between high and low water-mark granted by the Gover-nor-in-Council,'as an infringement of the Board's scope within the harbour, especially affecting the question of compensation in cases of resumption. He also objected to clause 54, referring to the requirements' in regard to boats plying for Jure in the ' harbour limits. He! argued that if the clause were carried < the management of a ferry company would have entire discretion as to the fitness of boats for a service. Mr. Bradney differed with Mr. Napier respecting the granting of certificates to vessels plying for hire. He considered that the rights possessed by the Board were at present ample, but he did not \ think that .the Board could or should be allowed to tamper with certificates granted by the Marine Department. The Board, he contended, was anxious to , claim a power they did not possess. He j further contended that the provisions were more drastic in New Zealand than! anywhere, in the King's Dominions. If! a ferry boat paid £100, say, for a certifi-! cate from the Department, were the j Board going to step in and declare that | certificate invalid? He wanted to know [1 what the Board were coming to.' The I •people were becoming dissatisfied with < the Harbour Board, and would begin ' to look for a new one. - • Mr. "Macfarlane: Mr. Millar says there is not a practical man amongst us. Mr. Bradney: That is so; 1 believe he is correct; ■ Mr. Macfarlane: I don't agree with you. Captain McKenzie: It is a downright shame for a man to stand up in the House and tell a pack of lies. Mr. Bradney detracted his agreement ' with the Minister, and proceeded to criti- ' else the Board in its control of boats. Mr. Napier moved as follows: — _, That this Board protests for the undermentioned reasous against the provisions of section 54 of "The Harbours' Amendment Act, 1910," which deprives the. local authority of all control of ferry steamers, and vest.3 such control In a Wellington Govern- < meat Department. - V Reasons (a)— The Marine Department's '' survey certificate under "Tho Shipping and < Seamen's Act, 1003," does not take account of matters peculiarly applicable to ferry ) steamers, aud the Department vow grants i certificates for various classes of steamers , which would uot be suitable for ferry ser- ' vices in the Auckland Harbour. * j. (b) That tho tights couferred upon Har- ; 1 hour Boards by re-enactment in "The Har- U hours Act, 1003," of controlling the ferry i service, which rights have been enjoyed for j I 39 years, ought uot to be' abrogated. (c) That the proposed change will in- F"j volve the running in the ferry services of ' the Takapuua, Victoria, Bum, aud similar i' unsuitable vessels. > - (d) . That the proposed change is wrong i Iv principle, ns the people have a light to j govern themselves through their local bodle« i and not to be governed uy a distant bureau- * crat. '. , j (c) That it is a wrong thing for n Gov-!I eminent -t> give greater weight to the re- i * presentations ot an Interested furry com-!' pany ,thau to those of the whole people of ' a district. I ~2. This Board also protests against clause • .59, of the proposed bill, which gives power ' to the Governor-lu-Coun-eil without the concurrence of harbour boards to grant to pri- ' vate Individuals leases of the foreshore, ( empowering the lessees to reclaim the land, and compels hoards, if requiring to construct harbour works affecting lauds so reclaimed by private persons, to pay heavy compensation. This Board affirms the principle that no leases of the foreshore should be granted to private persons or companies but in auy case that the consent of the l Board should be required thereto. 3. That the foregoing - resolutions be ' printed, and a copy be sent not later than J 12th inst. to the Premier, all members of both Houses of Parliament, tbe newspapers c in the four chief cities, and the secretary * of the Harbours* Association. " ■ ——— s