HUTT VALLEY POWER

Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 145, 16 December 1927, Page 10

HUTT VALLEY POWER

HOW THE SCALE WORKS

REVISION PROMISED NEXT

YEAR

The Lower Hutt Borough Council recently complained to the Hutt Valley Power Board against being asked to pay a minimum rate of 5s per meter for the lighting of pumping stations, the lights at which were very seldom used. Yesterday the board considered a report by the'engineer (Mr. E. Bickerstaff) giving particulars as to the revenue derived from and the units supplied to the Lower Hutt Borough Council for the lighting and driving of the pumping stations. For all the pumping stations the council paid £308 los lid for power. The lighting charges were, for the main pumps £2 Bs, with the minimum of 5s exceeded only in the three winter months; for the Randwick road pump £1 10s, being 5s for each month, with only 16 units used and an average cost of 22.5 d per unit; for the Tirohanga station, over the months of August and September, £4 9s 2d, an average of 5.5 d per unit;, and for the Alicetown pumps £1 10s for 7 units, an average of 4s 3.4 d per unit. Over the whole lighting installation there was a total bill of £9 17s 2d for 302 units and a.price per unit of 7.8 d. Excluding the Tirohanga pumps the average cost was Is per unit. Finally the report recommended that tho charge be altered to 6d per unit with no minimum charge.

Mr. A. J. M'Curdy moved that tho report be approved, but Mr. L. Stewart moved as an amendment that no action be taken. It would not be right, he said, to reduce the council's charges while the groat body of consumers was complaining in vain against the minimum cLarge of 5s per meter. "At tho last meeting," he said, "I proposed that we revise our charges, but nothing canio of it, and I am going to oppose strongly any one case being given special consideration."

Mr. J. W. M'Ewan said ho would second the amendment on principle. At 6d per unit the council would pay about £7 10s, while they actually paid £9 17s 2d, the difference being comparatively slight. The board intended to revise its charges at the end of the financial year, and if an exception was going to be made in that one case the board would let itself in for trouble. Mr. W. H. Lawreike also supported the amendment. Mr. S. Blackley: "None of you can say it is fair to charge the Lower Hutt Council 4a 3d or 22s 3d per unit It seems ridiculous that we should be putting in these meters, one of which registered only seven units in six months." Mr. Hobbs: "A month ago I favoured the charge being made on the units, but a remark passed then by Mr. Stewart inclines me to support tho amendment. Notwithstanding the fact that the Hutt may use only one unit, that might fall on our peak load, and it woxild cost us no more if they used their lights all the time. When the matter of charges is gone into I hope we will be able to meet these consumers and the small power consumers." The amendment was carried.

In reply to Mr. B. • Windley, Mr. Hobbs said it was expected to revise tho charges at tho end of the financial year, and tho new rates would come into effect on Ist April, 1928. Mr. Windley then gave notice of motion: "That when tho matter of revising tho charges is under consideration, tho engineer be asked to prepare a scale of charges."