Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 1927. DRAINAGE SCHEME

Greymouth Evening Star, 26 November 1927, Page 6

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 1927. DRAINAGE SCHEME

JT is to bo hoped that Grcymoulh Borough residents, generally will respond to the Mayor’s invitation to study, meanwhile, the proposals for the installation of a modern drainage system in the borough, as framed by the Borough Engineer and published in yesterday’s “Star.” For years past, a mild controversy has periodically taken place on the subject, some

urging that the present position was disgraceful and dangerous, whilst others declared that modern drainage was a luxury the Borough could not afford. The

presentation of Mr. Fairmaid s report must now compel serious attention of Councillors and citizens to the drainage project, and it is to be-hoped that such consideration will be free from prejudice.

On broad principles, there will be little opposition to the claim that Greymouth would be a muchimproved residential area, by the orovision of modern drainage, as the defects and hygienic risks of the present primitive arrangements are obvious. Those accustomed to nothing better, perhaps, do not realise the disadvantages of the present system, but visitors from more progressive towns, arc candid in their criticism. Greymouth will never be a popular resort for tourists, especially those with money, whilst a modern drainage system is lacking. Moreover, as the town grows, the defect will become more noticeable. From the health viewpoint, the Borough now takes serious risks, especially in those periods of comparative “drought.” Were it not for the frequent rain, objectionable smells and germ-laden breezes would multiply, and the community would pay a heavy price for its indifference to sanitary standards. It must not be forgotten that, the Health Department can compel the Borough to install modern drainage, and strong hints have been forthcoming that such action is possible, if Greymouth shirks what ihe Department considers to he the town’s clear duty. From the point of convenience, residents would greatly gain by modern drainage facilities, and district standards of culture and aesthetics also would advance.

The foregoing will be, perhaps, generally granted, but opposition may eome from those who look mainly at the cost, of the scheme. They, quite fairly, ask if the Borough can afford so large an outlay. The public debt has long been high, and was increased recently by the Power Board’s requirements. The local debt has reached a figure where the cautious hesitate to add to it. The annual rates, too, are as much as most citizens desire to pay. Increase in rates is certain, if modern drainage is provided, and there will also be the house-owners’ individual outlay for the necessary sanitary equipment. The opposition will declare that the present system, although not ideal, has met the Borough’s needs, and that there is no real necessity to go to the large expense to obtain what they regard as a “luxury.”

We have endeavoured to Summarise briefly what ’will be the probable attitudes of the respective parties, for and against, in connection with modern drainage installation. The technical details of Mr. Fairmaid’s schemes may be left to experts, whose duty it will be to see that if the citizens approve a drainage loan, that the money is spent to the best advantage. What the citizens have to do now is to think over the pros, and cons, of the whole business, and thus be prepared to give their decision based on intelligent, reflection. Offhand, despite the expense, the case for modern drainage seems overwhelming, but the opposition will not be insignificant, at least at first. The “reformers” must get busy to convert the others, if modern drainage is to be an early acquisition by the Borough.