Westport Rejection Of Modified Scheme

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30540, 8 September 1964, Page 11

Westport Rejection Of Modified Scheme

(From Our Own Reporter)

WESTPORT, September 7.

The Prime Minister (Mr Holyoake) will be asked by the XV estport Harbouh- Advisory’ Committee for the Government to proceed immediately with the £650,000 port development scheme which he announced on August 30 of last year with the approval of the Cabinet.

The decision was made at a special meeting of the committee after the presentation of an alternative scheme, to narrow only the entrance, was outlined by the Minister of Marine (Mr Scott) during a hurried visit to the district last week, accompanied by department advisers.

Members considered that the new plan w® disappointing after Mr Holyoake had been so definite on steps to be taken to extend the harbour walls and also narrow the entrance. It was claimed that the Minister of Marine had later made a statement through the member of Parliament for Buller (Mr W. E. Rowling) substantiating the Prime Minister’s announcement and advising that tenders would be called for the big scheme in April of this year to cicse in June. The acting-chairman (Mr C. F. Schadick) said that the Minister of Works (Mr Allen) had spoken of his department’s interest in the main project when he had visited Westport.

“Sudden Move”

Committee members were surprised that, after hearing Mr Holyoake’s very dear and promising statement on the first project, there had been a sudden move in favour of a less costly scheme. In a letter clarifying his suggestion of last week the Secretary of Marine (Mr G. L. O’Halloran) said that the new scheme, estimated to cost £300,000, provided an alternative method of giving the permanent improvement of the major plan while not providing the same measure of temporary improvement in combating tidal drifts. It was emphasised that the possibility of further extensions and even more narrowing of the port entrance would not be prejudiced or precluded by acceptance- of the alternative. It was said that it would be possible now

to call tenders for the larger job, with expectations of the contractor beginning work in February next, but the Ministry of Works would need two months to go into the other scheme, with hope of the work beginning in March. The major project would take three years to complete and the other two years. Regarding filling of the eastern wall to narrow the entrance, the letter said that unless the contractor had ideas of using stone from the Buller river and conveying it by rail, it would come from the Cape Foulwind-Tauranga bay area, necessitating upgrading of the road route. It was considered that strengthening of the Buller bridge would not be needed if the contractor used multi-axled vehicles and, if none could be used, bridge work would have to be faced by the Ministry of Works. The letter dealt with the use of cement blocks and said a decision on their use would be made in the light of events. In considering it wise to allow one contractor to do the work, it was pointed out that there was little skilled labour on the West Coast for such work, an instance being only six local men employed on the briquette works at Ngakawau. Mr Rowling said at the meeting that the first section of the letter would be linked with the Prime Minister’s statement that there would be an improvement of up to 4ft in bar depths for about 10 years, but then the position would drift to a permanent 2ft. He considered that much more desirable than merely trying now for the regular 2ft.

Mr J. Gallagher, Railways Department’s representative, said that the alternative scheme would come more quickly and extension of the walls could come later if pressure demanded. Mr W. Andrews (Trades Council) quoted the Prime Minister as saying last year “full loads and bigger vessels will leave the port and it will be able to work more efficiently when this scheme is completed.” He felt it strange now that

there should be such an about face.

At the meeting last week the Minister indicated that because of vagaries of the weather work on the original scheme was Likely to be interrupted and therefore bring a tender which could be unacceptable to the Government, whereas the Ministry of Works could do the work on the new project, narrowing the channel by adding to the inside of the eastern wall, with local labour.

The chairman said that the Ministry of Works had been working for 10 months on tenders for the major job and should call them now to see just what price was offering and if the Minister had any justification for feeling that tenders might be too high. He recalled Mr Allen saying that specifications were being sent to overseas interests and the Commissioner of Works at. Christ church (Mr B. D. Dallas) saying that tenders were to have been called in May.

“Should Fight”

Mr Andrews: We should fight this ; out to the limit and ask (he Prime Minister what he meant by his statement last'May. He thought that the committee would lose the good will of all Buller people if it accepted * the alternative scheme.

When Mr J, Gotter (miners’ council) .spoke on the need for a good port in the handling of coal for ‘ the North Island, he was corrected by the chairman and Mr Rowling when he said that legislation had been passed confining the Chelsea Sugar Refinery and Portland Cement Works (Buller’s best customers) to the continued use of coal instead of oil from the new refinery. Mr Rowling said that there had definitely been no legislation to that effect, although there had been some statements on the Government’s desire to protect the coal industry and the Mines Department was working to make coal as attractive as possible to such concerns.