The Press THURSDAY, JUNE 10, 1971. The Manapouri report

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32629, 10 June 1971, Page 10

The Press THURSDAY, JUNE 10, 1971. The Manapouri report

The recommendation of the Parliamentary Select Committee on Lake Manapouri clearly favours the petitions of those who oppose the raising of the lake to produce electric power. It will not please those who hoped for a decisive recommendation to the Government that would secure, for all time, the conservation of the lake’s natural level. To the extent that the question remains open, the position of the present Government is largely unchanged. Many petitioners held that the raising of the lake should not be treated as a fait accompli and that the Government should respect public opinion. On this point the committee made its most important proposal: that Parliament itself should give its authority before the lake is raised. This recommendation on its own might satisfy the many petitioners who were obviously prepared to say that a Government should let the public heart rule the public head—that is, allow any strong expression of public opinion, or sentiment, to overrule all economic and technical considerations. Those who hold this view will not be so pleased to learn that the committee has also recommended provision in the building of the Mararoa dam for the lake to be raised “ in the future if necessary If successive Governments abide by the committee’s recommendations, the contract to supply electricity to Comalco will remain subject to the will of Parliament. That is not unreasonable in itself; but a decision to hold the lake level implies the acceptance of certain, possibly onerous, consequences by New Zealand taxpayers and electricity consumers. They may have to forgo their share of cheap electricity from the Manapouri power station; they will have to meet the cost of producing alternative power; and they might at some time have to meet the financial liability for any failure to supply sufficient power to the aluminium industry. These costs might, in some circumstances, be very large indeed. Satisfying as it must be to see the Government respecting public opinion on the lake and admitting, in effect, that an error was made by previous Governments, no-one should pretend that the error can now be corrected cheaply and painlessly. At least the whole sorry affair should help to avoid similar mistakes in the future.