Electricity Council Meets Frustration

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30497, 20 July 1964, Page 3

Electricity Council Meets Frustration

(From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, July 19. The frustration and divided mind of the Electricity Advisory Council in its efforts without power of direction, to co-ordinate or amalgamate the power distribution systems of supply authorities are revealed in its first report to Parliament and in a letter to the Electric Supply Authorities’ Association.

The report on the first year’s work of the council was presented to Parliament last week.

The letter, reprinted in the latest issue of the association’s journal, “Live Lines,”

was sent by the Minister of Electricity (Mr Shand) to the executive committee of the association and conveyed a request from the chairman of the council, Mr J. W. Nissen. “Live Lines” reports that Mr Nissen said it was not the intention of the council to interfere with the reorganisation within the industry initiated by supply authorities themselves. Rather than that, the council encouraged individual action, but it was desirable it should be kept informed of such developments. NO SUCCESS In its annual report, however, the council says It is unable to report any success in the field of co-ordination. Four power boards have amalgamated voluntarily, says the council, but “it is only by mutual agreement or by external persuasion” that amalgamations can be achieved unless the council or the Minister are given powers of direction.

The council says that the view of the Committee on Local Authority Finance, 1963, on the advantages to ratepayers of the profits from electricity undertakings by territorial bodies, is calculated to cause fragmentation of the industry rather than co-ordination as aimed at by the Electricity Advisory Council Act. NOTICED FRICTION In his preface to the annual report to Parliament from the Electricity Department, Mr Shand says he has noted various instances of friction in

the pattern of electricity distribution which have caused concern over recent years. Difficulties recur over tariff anomalies, bulk supply charges and the adjustment of supply authority boundaries, he says. “Since becoming Minister of Electricity, I have been giving close attention to possible means of improvement of the organisation of distribution and the important association question of fair recompense to distribution authorities adversely affected by amalgamation or realignment of boundaries. In another article in “Live Lines,” background notes on aspects of distribution released by Mr Shand say: “The conflict is, I think, an ideological one. There is a fundamental point for decision: whether power supply should be a function of territorial local government, or whether it should be organised independently in such a way that the benefit of the consumers is the fundamental criterion.” NOT ACCEPTABLE

He says it has become clear that the recommendations of the advisory council are not acceptable to the municipal supply authorities in particular. But unless there is a change in the law, the Minister cannot make any changes in respect of most cases of conflict over boundaries, says Mr Shand. He has been investigating the possibility of developing criteria for dealing with boundary adjustments, he says.