HARBOUR BOARDS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 899, 19 August 1910, Page 2

HARBOUR BOARDS.

QUESTION OF .REPRESENTATION. PARLIAMENTARY FRANCHISE PROBABLE. Replying to a Canterbury deputation on the subject of representation on the Lyttelton Harbour Board yesterday, tho Hon. J. A. Millar made some observations of general interest. He said he had known wheii he started with the- Bill that, tho trouble would come from Lyttelton and Auckland. Year by year the Lyttelton'Board had additions made-to it, till its representation' had got up to 19 members. ' If they went on at that rate they would soon get up to 2fi. The idea of the new Bill was to equalise the whole of the boards as far as possible in regard to representation. His endeavour was to keep down tho cost of the elections. To do that they' had to take the existing boundaries so that ono roll would do. It was quite true that .the municipal franchise was a wider franchise than the country franchise, and he would have no objection to alter the country franchise in the same direction, but it would mean that new rolls would have to be printed, because they would need a special Harbour Board roll if ivomon were to got the vote. Ho would not bo surprised to see tho Parliamentary franchiso put in before tho : Bill got through tho House. Ho wo'uld-go, into the question of Lyttelton's representation, but he did not want these boards to increase in size. Unless they could get a uniform system of representation for!tho boards they might as well leave them as they were and let tho Bill go. Fourteen meaibers constituted <d big board,' and travelling expenses would bo heavy enough with the representation suggested, As to representation by tho payers of dues, he certainly thought the payers of shipping dues should have representation on tho boards. If It wero' not for the ships their harbours would not bo worth a rap. Only the other day a master had declined to tnko his ship up to Auckland, because there was not enough water there. Ho could understand objection to representation of tho payers of dues, biyt not to representaion of the payers of shipping dues. The shipowners wero entitled to direct representation. Ho proposed to put in' tho Bill a general clause that would include in a county any borough, town, district, or road district not' specially exempted. As to Government nominees, personally ho was not very particular about that. Otago had four, Lyttelton one, Wellington three, and Auckland two. His idea was to equalise tho number all through. He did not care if it was brought down to ono—(hear, hear)—but ho would like to retain tho principle of having some Government representation on tho boards. At Lyttelton, for instance, the Government had a big interest in the harbour, because of their expenditure on railways.