Labour attack on drainage policies

Press, 14 December 1977, Page 6

Labour attack on drainage policies

Labour Party members of the Christchurch Drainage Board last evening started a concerted thrust against present board policies.

Mr J F. Davidson, back after a three-year absence, isaid he would even like to see the Pon Hills classified I a- National Park as the only certain way of controlling ! building on the slopes and restricting erosion problems. He said there had been little progress since 1951, when hillside problems were recognised in an official !board report. Another board member !said it was not right to say i that nothing had happened 'on the hills in that time. “Nothing but building," Mr Da"idson said. 1 “How many times do you I have to gather the same information?” said Mr M. J. I Dobson, a new Labour member. “You may replicate reIsearch once, but then you {are supposed to proceed further.” | Mr Davidson then came {back to his familiar argument that the “floodgate 'solution” was the only good i answer to flooding in lower I (reaches of the Heathcote River. “Some say that is not{ {economically viable,” he said, i “But the board has accepted ja solution (the Woolston Cut I and stopbanks) that will not Ido the job. in my opinion." Although he knew the techinical answers that the board • majority and staff would igive, he wanted the public to I know the same thing. He s" ; d the “average man {in the street” was not getting i good answers on where to go I when he needed drainage (help. Even many local body, members did not know the limits of their powers, or where others took over resnonsibilitv in specific situations. The board’s chairman (Mr M. R. Carter) speculated that Mr Davidson must have been hibernating for three years, since r ocedures were already in motion to bring, those responsibilities into{ sharper focus. < Two non-Labour members,!! Mr R. A. Bamford and Mr. J. de C. Hanifin, said there was merit in Mr Davidson’s ' suggestion that whatever is I worked out between local bodies should be put in a form available to the public. Mr Hanifin said the information might be compiled for the Citizens’ Advice Bureau. Mr Bamford said it might be

put into a booklet telling persons who they could contact when they had drainage problems.

Some Labour members said that two planned pollution prosecutions should go ahead against the Christchurch Gas, Coal, and Coke Company, Ltd, instead of being shelved this time because of “the improved spirit of co-operation being shown by the top man-; agement of the companv,” ac-i cording to a w’orks commit-; tee report.

But Mr H. W. Thompson disagreed, saying: “When you have caned them half a dozen times, as we have, then you should not continue to cane them when they show some co-operation." Mr C. H. Russell said he has been unhappy about the lack of prosecutions at first, but the new management

should be given a chance. When Mr Bamford said he had seen very little work going on by riverside grass cutters yesterday — their foreman had said they were waiting for the tide to go out so they could reach some of the grass — Mr Davidson rose to the defence of those workers, as did Mr Thompson. Mr Davidson said that oersons unfamiliar with river work should not be quick to criticise the amount being done. Mr Thompson said he had always been impressed by the high standard of board workers, who were "remarkable” in the way they re-! sponded to mopping-up needs; during bad weather. After snap debates in several areas, some board members said thev could see that it would be an interest-1