Heathcote heated on electricity price

Press, 27 February 1981, Page 4

Heathcote heated on electricity price

Electricity charges were the subject of a bitter argu | ment at a meeting of the Heathcote County Counci! last evening. Cr J. Richardson sire | nuously opposed a recom- ; mendation from the elec,'

' tricity committee that yie; i council support the Christ-; ' church City Council’s policy of withholding the 9 per cent increase in the bulKi power charge until the legality of the demand had been. 'Settled. , .. . | He said that the refusal I would be a backward move land that councillors had not [been elected to start ’not paving our way.” The County Chairman (Mr \V. M. Hindmarsh) and Cr M C. C. Buchanan argued that the City Council move had been successful because it had produced a “real movement” from the Minister. Cr Buchanan said the City Council had had discussions with the Minister, which was more than the consultations allowed for in the electricity agreement. Mr Hindmarsh said the Heathcote committee’s recommendation stood, even

if the City Council decided to sign the bulk-tariff agreement. “The council had doubts about the validity of the bulk-electricity charge and that still stands,” he said.

Inquiries were being made about the legality of the demand. The decision could be ' reviewed if it was found | there was not a solid case for questioning the demand’s 1 legality. ■ The council paid its elec-! I tricity charges each quarter! and the first payment at the! higher rates was due in! June. If the legal matter had not been settled then, the council would pay the full amount, including the extra 9 per cent, but it would be refunded if the council won its case.

Cr Richardson demanded that a letter from the council’s solicitor be tabled at the meeting. Mr Hindmarsh refused, saying that the let. ter had been circulated to councillors and was confidential. It could be read in committee.

However. Cr Richardson read a paragraph from the letter saying that any councillors supporting the nonpayment of the tariff opened

1 themselves to liability. In a ) fiery exchange, Cr Richard|son asked Mr Hindmarsh to leave the chair, but Mr Hindmarch remained. Mr Richardson said Mr Hindmarsh was making a fool of the 'chair and of the council. ; Cr T. P. Wills moved an (amendment that the council irefuse to sign the agreement ■ until there were negotiations with the Minister. : Some councillors supported the idea but Mr Hindmarsh said the move would ■ put the council back to I where it was six months ago. The amendment was lost.

The meeting decided to withhold the 9 per cent increase until the legality issue was settled, and that the County Solicitor should ask for confirmation that the county’s electricity supply would continue until the matter was settled.

The counci accepted a recommendation that the price of electricity to consumers be increased by 11.4 per cent from April 1. This increase covers the bulk-tar-iff increase plus 2.4 per cent to meet increased wages and costs.