PAYING FOR POWER

Press, Volume XCVI, Issue 28399, 4 October 1957, Page 14

PAYING FOR POWER

House Continues Debate

‘New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, October 3.

The people were being asked to pay for future capital expenditure as well as past capital expenditure, but many of the consumers would be dead by the time the works they were paying for became operative, said Mr W. A Hudson (Opposition, Morningtoni in the House of Representatives this evening when the debate on the Electrical Energy Amendment Bill was resumed. Mr R. E. Jack (Government. Patea) said the debate had died many speeches ago, but the corpse still inhabited the chamber because Opposition members wanted to make capital out of increases in power charges.

Mr R. A. Keeling (Opposition Gisborne) said that Labour’s main objection to the bill centred on the proposal to finance capital works out of revenue. This would be placing a load on present-day consumers to make provision for posterity. Some provision should be made for posterity, but posterity would have to face its own problems.

The Government was legisla'mg for price increases for electricity, said Mr Keeling. The proposal to finance capital works from revenue was opposed to two great principles of taxation—that people should pay according to their ability to .pay, and that taxation should only be levied for current matters and for the repayment of past expense. "Will Make for Economy” Mr T. L. Hayman (Government, Oamaru) said that electricity was New Zealand’s popular source of energy, and as far as he could see it was going to increase 'n popularity. There would be increases in the price of power, and this could have one advantage: it would make for some economy in the use of electricity. Mr R Boord (Opposition, Rotoruif), said that those with large families, who used a lot of power, would have to pay the most. This was fundamentally unjust. Mr Boord asked if the Government was going to extend this new principle to other forms of capital expenditure such as the railways, which showed a loss of £5.000,000 last year. Mr Boord said it Would be logical for the base power load of the North Island to be shifted to the steam at Wairakei. Hydroelectric power could then be kept for peak loads. Wairakei had a potential of 1.000.000 kilowatts, but the Government was dawdling with its development. Mr A. E. Kinsella (Government, Hauraki) said that the provisions of the bill were not new. Today 25 per cent, of capital charges were met from revenue of the power boards. Power would be dearer if the money was borrowed. Wairakei was being developed to the greatest possible extent consistent with prudence. Mr E. J. Keating (Opposition Hastings) said the Minister of Finance (Mr J. T Watts) might talk in his budget about how he was going to lower taxation, but he would get the money by other means, and people would be paying just as much. “The Government has depleted the sources from which it can get capital, and. now it has devised this expedient by which it can take the money out of the people,” he said. The debate was interrupted by the adjournment.