ELECTRIC POWER RETICULATION

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21973, 23 December 1936, Page 13

ELECTRIC POWER RETICULATION

TO THE EDITOR OF THE PRESS. Sir,—ln connexion with your leading aiticle of December 21, and your further comment in your issue of the following day, made as the result of a discussion on the subject by my board, may I say that both the board and myself were very well aware of the meaning of your article. The picture which you paint of an impulsive chairman with a background of members pouring forth a flpod of figures relating to sinking funds, etc., will no doubt Ti? ve e .Rcct which you desire, although it is entirely apart from the true facts. I think that any of your readers having in mind your previous references to the subject, notably your leading article of June 23 last, could come to no other conclusion than that you favour nationalisation, I find no fault with that—everyone is entitled to his opinion, but I do consider that when such ideas are expressed, they should be supported by something more than general statements as to the benefits to be derived. In your leading article of December 21. you stated that the savings effected by nationalisation would almost certainly make it unnecessary to increase electrical charges or to place an extra burden on taxpayers in so far as the reticulation of outside areas is concerned—a statement which was quite rightly taken exception to by certain of the members as being unsupported by any facts: and it was in connexion with this point that some brief remarks were made as lo administration costs and sinking funds.— Yours, etc., E. F. NICOLL, Chairman, Ashburton E.P. Board. December 22, 1936. IWe are content to let our readers decide for themselves whether the remarks made about our article revealed an accurate knowledge ot Us contents. Obviously it is impossible to give any precise estimate of the savings which would be effected by nationalisation. It is worth pointing out, however, that nationalisation would prevent the use of electricity profits for the relief of local rates. The profits which have been made on the sale of electricity in Christchurch would easily pay for the reticulation of the Amuri and Cheviot counties. We can hardly be blamed for not elaborating this point in our leading article, since it was incidental to the main argument.—Ed., “The Press.”]