ELECTRICITY CHARGES.

Evening Star, Issue 21147, 6 July 1932, Page 10

ELECTRICITY CHARGES.

TO THE BDITOK.

Sir, —It was interesting to read that the Christchurch City Council had again made' a reduction in the electricity charges, which will benefit the consumers to the extent of £IO,OOO to £12,000. It seems that the Labour Council in Christchurch is doing something for its citizens, not only by reducing the electricity charges, but also by reducing the rates. The council emnioyees have not received any reduction in wages, and all this has been done by a Labour council: here we have no Labour council; the council employees have received a reduction in wages, and the council has made big profits in its electrjc light department, and has not sTet5 T et benefited the consumers, by reducing the electricity charges. If the Christchurch City Council can reduce the electricity charges without reducing the employees’ wages, then I cannot see any reason why our City Council cannot reduce the electricity charges, seeing that it has made the other reduction. Surely the Dunedin City Council can do what the Christchurch Council has done, or shall we have to wait until we have a Labour Council?—l am, etc., July 5. Civis.

[Cr Marlow (chairman of the Electric Power and Lighting Committee) points out that during the current year the City Council has made two substantial reductions in charges for electricity. One of these means a remission of over £3,000 by reason of the removal of the capacity charge to domestic users, and the other of about; £2,000 by the wiping out of the minimum charge to users, of electric ranges. At the meeting of the City Council to-night Cr Harlow proposes to make a statement showing that consumers of electricity in Dunedin pay less than those iu Christchurch.—Ed. E.S.]