Opposition bill on crane

Press, 18 March 1985, Page 6

Opposition bill on crane

Wellington reporter Any threat from the Otago Harbour Board to Lyttelton’s container facility would be removed by legislation now before Parliament, says Mr Phillip Burdon (Nat., Fendalton). He spoke on Friday in support of a bill introduced by the Opposition spokesman on transport, Mr Winston Peters. Mr Peters has proposed an amendment to provisions governing capital spending in the New Zealand Ports Authority Act as they apply to existing equipment. Under the act, boards must obtain the authority’s consent for spending above a certain sum — in Lyttelton’s case,. $500,000. The intention is to regulate the industry nationally and to ensure that competition between ports does not lead to over-development as they each improve their facilities to attract business. Mr Peters’s bill maintains

this principle but provides that boards, when replacing or repairing plant, may add the insured value of the item to their prescribed spending limit before having to get fresh authorisation. Because the crane repair costs, at $2.75 million, exceed Lyttelton’s $500,000 margin, the board has had to advertise so that objections might be lodged with the Ports Authority — an opportunity its Port Chalmers rival has seized on. Mr Peters said that had his amendment been in force, Lyttelton would have been spared this “frustrating red tape” because it would have been free to spend to $3.25 million. The board had already obtained consent for a container crane, at the time of purchase, and had to go through the whole procedure again. “The business, trade, and export and import future of the South Island should not . continue to be at risk because of bureaucratic and legislative inertia,” he said. He read a telegram from the Canterbury Manufacturers’ Association urging all members of Parliament to support the legislation. The Minister of Transport, Mr Prebble, said the bill should be sent to a select committee but that, once there, he hoped it would “sit and rot for a very long time.” He accused Mr Peters, who as member for Tauranga represents the second biggest port in New Zealand, of “trying to revive the old container row •- a mischievous thing to do.” Mr Prebble was the only Government member to speak in the debate, leading Mr Burdon to charge Christchurch’s four Cabinet Ministers — Mrs Hercus and Messrs Palmer, Moore and Caygill — with failure to attend to the interests of their electorates. Mrs Hercus, the member for Lyttelton, later said, “If a bill amending the Ports Authority Act would have been of any practical use to the port of Lyttelton, the board would undoubtedly have asked for an amending bill and I certainly would have introduced it.” The chairman of the New Zealand Authority, Rear Admiral Saul, said from Auckland last evening that he had assured the Lyttelton Harbour Board there would be no delay in coming to a decision on whether Lyttelton received a replacement crane.