AVAILABILITY RATE.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 7 February 1928, Page 4

AVAILABILITY RATE.

AN ELTHAM PROTEST. MEETING OF RATEPAYERS. A meeting, convened by the Mayer of Eltham (Mr 1. J. Bridget) was held in tlie Town Hall, Eltham, last evening, in response to a. petition by ratepayers protesting against the imposition of the availability rate by the Taranaki Efljeiqrtnic Power Board. There was an attendance of about 150 ratepayers within the Power Board’s area, a very Lange proportion hailing from the neighbourhood of Stratford. The chair was occupied by Mr Bridge r, who introduced the principal speaker, Mr N. H. Moss, of Stratford. Mr Moss, who has been appointed chairman of the provisional executive of the Ratepayers’ Protection Association formed at Stratford on Tuesday last, addressed the meeting at length oil the same lines he adopted at the Stratford meeting, and reported in the columns of “The Hawera Star.” Tlie speaker stressed the point that tho board’s expenditure has greatly exceeded the estimates; no satisfactory explanation of its action in this respect had been given to the ratepayers; the board had refused to publish its bal-ance-sheet ; and he declared that it had last the confidence qf the ratepayers. On the motion of the chairman ft hearty vote of thanks for his address was carried by acclamation. Mr Bridger explained that the Eltham Borough Council was not antagonistic to the Power Board, as proved by its endeavour to. assist the board with an expenditure of £SOO on street lighting .installations. The council, however had a responsibility of £17,000 or £IB,OOO in regard to the gasworks, which, was really a ratepayers’ responsibility and in championing the cause of the already oppressed ratepayer th<3 council did not approve of the availability rate. A general rate over the borough would be more equitable and mare productive for the board. A general ra,te> of one penny in the £ on the capital value qf borough 0 property (£53,800) would produce £2250 as against £ISOO which the imposition of the availability rate was calculated to produce. Speaking personally, he said he was aware that the Government, and not the Power Board, was responsible tor the Act (Which made the availability rate possible—the latter body was merely putting it into operation. He appealed for justice to the non-consumers and owners of vacant sections, for which power was not required, and strongly objected to the policy of force which compelled non-consumers to pay the amount allowed to consumers. Mr J. H. Gower moved that: “This meeting protests against the Taranaki Electric Power Board striking the availability rate and that in the opinion of the meeting a general rate would be more productive and equitable.” Mr G. H. P. Fitzgerald considered it inadvisable, in the absence of reliable data in reference to the ratepayers’ liability under an alternative rate, to pass any resolution. Mr T. B. Crump concurred and moved as an amendment that,: “Consideration of the question be deferred, and that a meeting of ratepayers be held on a date to be determined after the chairman of the Power Board has published his promised declaration.” The mover considered that the meeting bad been called for the purpose of entering a protest against the availability irate, and not for the purpose of suggesting a remedy or alternative. More information and data was required, and a meeting of • ratepayers, to which the chairman of tlie Power Board should be invited, .should be convened with the object of gaining that information The amendment was seconded by Mr J. L. Campbell and carried. Mr Moss said he thought that Mr Crump would agree with him that there was some doubt as to the legality • f the Power Board’s action in striking an availability rate ;it had the power to strike a general uniform rate.