“VERY DRASTIC” BILL

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 37, 7 November 1933, Page 8

“VERY DRASTIC” BILL

Restriction on Drainage HARBOUR BOARD POWERS Reference to the Harbour Amendment Bill now before Parliament was made at the meeting of the Finance Committee of the Wellington City Council last evening by the Mayor, Mr. T. C. A. Hislop. He said that this measure was one of considerable importance. At present corporations had the right to discharge certain matter into a harbour, subject to the consent of the Harbour Board concerned. If the 'board did not consent the question could be referred to arbitration, and the arbitrators could decide on what terms and conditions such discharge could be made. The new Bill was very drastic. It included a clause which made it an offence punishable by a fine of £10(1 for any person or body to discharge any silt or polluted water into a harbour. There was no mention of arbitration. The Mayor said he thought they should seek an opportunity to give evidence before a committee of the House. As president of the Municipal Association he would circulate the various bodies with a view to having their views presented. It was quite reasonable for harbour hoards to have a measure of control over the harbours, but to put local bodies entirely in their hands ■was going farther than was necessary. He asked the consent of the council for himself and the City Solicitor to appear before the Parliamentary Committee. Cr. C. IT. Chapman (also a member of the Haibour Board) made it clear that, the measure was promoted, not by the Wellington board, but by the Harbour Boards’ Association, and did not. apply to Wellington harbour alone. The Bill consisted largely of amendments which had been proposed for some years past, and never enacted. Cr. M. L. Luckie agreed with the Mayor’s suggestion. Cr. R. JfcKeen said that the harbour boards were seeking to protect the Interests they were administering. This way of doing things only resulted in conflict, and the best thing to do was to refer the matter to the respective associations. It was mentioned that possibly the measure would not go before a Parliamentary committee. In that case, Cr. Luckie proposed that the Mayor should see the Prime Minister. The consent asked for was given the Mayor, who said that the City Solicitor would watch the progress of the Bill carefully.