Quango is no longer necessary?

Press, 9 July 1983, Page 17

Quango is no longer necessary?

The New Zealand Ports Authority, which made the decision not to allow the reopening of the Oamaru port, was set up in 1968, mainly to oversee the setting up of container ports. Since then, the container boom has past and, by and large, so has the authority’s job. It has tended to get involved in more minor matters. It is believed in Oamaru that the Treasury has written a report to the Prime Minister recommending the dismantling of the Ports Authority, because it is thought to serve no useful purpose. Asked if that was so, the M.P. for Waitaki, Mr Jonathan Elworthy, paused, and replied: “I couldn’t answer that.” He added that all quangos were being reviewed by the Treasury, and the Ports Authority was a quango. Pressed for further comment, he said he would like it if the Ports Authority was abolished. (It is believed that the Treasury opinion is that if any company — or local authority, or anyone else — wants to build a port anywhere in the country and the company considers it to be viable, it should be free to rise or fall on its own investment decision). However, noone in the Prime Minister’s Department was able to confirm that the report exists. The chairman of the Oamaru Harbour Committee, Mr ArthurFamilton, aged 77, has had much experience with local-body politics and quangos. He is scornful about the members of the Port Authority: “They’re all ex-Government mem-

bers, virtually, or defeated candidates, or somebody who was highly placed in the organisation — is that right?” In fact, only one member of the authority is a former Government member — the chairman. Sir Donald McKay, a former Minister of Health. The other members are Mr Frank Reeves, who was general manager of Teal (the predecessor of Air New Zealand); Mr Keith Calder, who was chairman of the Bay of Plenty Harbour Board; Mr Brian Cole, who was general manager of the Union Steam Ship Company; and Mr Russell Hervey, a former Mayor of Timaru. According to the Ports Authority Act, members of the authority are to act impartially, not favouring one area over another.

Appeals against Ports Authority decisions are heard by the Minister of Transport. Only two successful appeals have been made — and they were before Mr Gair became Minister of Transport. Mr Gair has heard one appeal, which was not upheld.

Before Mr Gair hears the appeals made by the Oamaru Borough Council and N.Z. Cement against the decision on the Oamaru port, he will visit the Oamaru and Timaru ports and the proposed cement works site at Weston. Mr Gair will not discuss the issue with the news media. He says any discussion would prejudice his position as the appeal authority. He also says he “will not be able to discuss issues relevant to the appeal with interested parties during his visit or prior to the appeal.” Mr Gair is presumably visiting the areas to gain information which he does not have. It has not been explained how he is to receive this information if the issue is not to be discussed by those showing him round.

Mr Gair’s press secretary, Mr Mike Player, emphasises that Mr Gair is the sole authority and “no reference is made to Cabinet.” However, Mr Elworthy has promised the Mayor of Oamaru, Mr Reg Denny, that the matter will be discussed by the Cabinet.

“I checked that with Jonathan (Elworthy) just the other day. He said it would go to Cabinet. Mr Gair will actually promulgate the decision by his signature. He is the appeal authority, but it will be a Cabinet decision,” says Mr Denny. “I’m sure it will be seen as a Government decision.”

Mr Elworthy says Cabinet members are free to raise any important matter in Cabinet, and he feels obliged to raise the subject, because of its importance for the South Island, and New Zealand. The harbour committee chairman also wants a Cabinet decision. “Mr Gair, being Minister of Railways and Minister of Transport, has two hats and has to take off one of them,” says Mr Familton. A decision not to reopen the Oamaru port would help the railways by giving it an annual cargo of about

250,000 tonnes of bulk cement. Mr Familton says that Mr Gair is “wrapped up in the Railways. He wants the Railways Corporation to make a success of a dying industry.” (The Railways Corporation, keen to win a contract to rail all the cement to the Timaru port, has offered to halve the normal rail charges. Oamaru people have referred to this as a taxpayersubsidised price, but the Railways says that to compare its schedule rate with a contract rate is meaningless). The appeal to the Minister of Transport must be made only on the ground of national interest. Mr Elworthy says he has told Mr Gair that the Ports Authority considered the national interest regarding port development, “but not the wider implications of the national interest — the whole growth strategy concept relating to the efficient use of resources, involving more jobs and exports.” The hearing of appeals is a lengthy, complex process. After Mr Gair has heard the discussion in Cabinet and examined the evidence

presented by the appellants, what will he decide? An Oamaru lawyer, Mr Richard Rowley, answers the question: “I don’t think he will be confined to the considerations that the Ports Authority members were confined to. They had to look at it in terms of the statute that they’re set up under. He is entitled to look at it from a wider point of view. I think there will be room for a political interpretation . . .”