Farmers reject ultimatum

Press, 1 November 1985, Page 1

Farmers reject ultimatum

The Ministry of Works and Development has threatened to close a MidCanterbury irrigation scheme if farmers do .not agree to pay a 90 per cent increase in water charges. A meeting of 100 angry farmers on Wednesday evening rejected the Ministry’s ultimatum that contracts should be renewed for the 1985-86 season or the water turned off. Most of the 150 farmers on the Mayfield-Hinds irrigation scheme have already started irrigating. The area was hit hard by the drought last summer and the loss of water would have a “drastic” effect, said the chairman of the May-field-Hinds Irrigation Society, Mr Peter Hermann. He said farmers were already struggling and

water was one way they could increase returns. , Farmers were becoming increasingly militant as their livelihoods were threatened, he said. Some of the farmers at Wednesday’s meeting had contributed stock to the protest slaughter at Mayfield earlier in the day. The increased charges were an attempt to recover running losses from the 40-year-old scheme. The accumulated deficit was about $1.7 million, Mr Hermann said. Farmers did not believe they should pay for losses incurred by a scheme which was set up without the benefit of a comprehensive study, he said. “During the dryland boom of the 1950 s and 1960 s we didn’t need water. Irrigation

didn’t really take off until the 19705, and it would have been better to set up the scheme then," said Mr Hermann. The farmers have agreed to pay the $150,000 deficit accumulated since the early 19705, spread over five to 10 years. Ssay this was conat a meeting with the Minister of Works and Development, Mr Colman, in June. However, when the contracts were sent out several months later it was evident the Ministry wanted the deficit repaid in one year. Mr Hormann said that the effect of the 1981-84 price freeze had been wiped and the new charges calculated on a 20 per cent per annum rise from the 1981 base year.

The Ministry wants to continue to increase water charges 20 per cent “indefinitely,” setting aside the extra revenue to pay for the planned improvement of the cphpmp “We don’t want the scheme upgraded and have been advised that it is not necessary,” Mr Hermann said.

The charges were also increased to give parity with newer schemes, said Mr Hormann. The water charge was a small cost over the $lOOO per hectare which fanners St on setting up irrigabut fanners could not give the Ministry carte blanche to increase the costs by such a big amount annually. The proposed charge is $16.10 per hectare compared

with $8.50 per hectare last year. The farmers believed the water charges they were Bg were close to cing the full cost of running the scheme and there had never been any suggestion that old “book” losses would be a future charge, he said.

Farmers have offered to pay $ll per hectare which would cover all scheme expenses with an estimated $1 per hectare towards past losses. , .

They will reiterate their offer when they meet Mr Colman at Timaru today.

The District Commissioner of Works in Christchurch, Mr R. D. Grant, declined to comment last evening.