BOROUGH WATER SUPPLY.

Hawera Star, Volume L, 26 July 1930, Page 9

BOROUGH WATER SUPPLY.

(To the Editor,) Sir, —Mr Sturrock, borough engineer, writes in yesterday’s “Star” the following: “With the heartiest goodwill Councillor Simpson virtually. accuses me of being the font and origin of this parish boundary trouble in that I did so advise, etc.” May I draw readers’ attention to the fact that what I wrote was that lie did not advise. The council for some time has been following the policy of refusing requests for further water supplies to non-ratepayers. Mr Sturrock was asked to report with a view to reconsidering our decision in that respect. He supplied a report, dated July 16, 1930, as asked for. His first paragraph reads: “In reply to the councils desire that I should report upon the advisability, or the contrary, of granting extraordinary water supplies, I think that the matter turns to some extent on policy' and that it will he best for me to try and put down some of the arguments and the council may then judge.” Mr Sturrock, therefore, clearly understood, I should say, the reason for asking for a report. I repeat, sir. my remark in my previous letter: “The engineer did not advise a change in policy.” Policy, I submit,, can only be determined on the evidence supplied by our technical adviser. The Question of who is first or last in time of danger is beside the question. I have never refused to shoulder my responsibility for voting in the council as I do. But I refuse, sir, to be out in the intolerable uosition of having to say what is the capacity of the borough water supply plant (for that is the crux of the whole problem) while the borough has an engineer whose duty, I think, is to determine that. In the" reoort referred to, Mr Sturrock writes, referring to the cost of duplication. “Just for this reason it looks as if it might he best to try and conserve for our own ratepayers the benefit of the booster.” Further on he writes: “My own personal feeling ns that we should find out what our securities are before we pledge them, but I would not care to offer this to the council as good advice to follow.” 1 have given two short extracts from two lengthy reports submitted to couneil —the said excellent reports, I think, containing: in all five to six tlionsanc words, but it would seem from the eneineer’s letter yesterday tliart- no places- himself in the same category as Bassanio placed Gratiano when he said: “Gratiano speaks an infinite dea of uotliino more than any man m all Venice. His reasons are as two grains of wheat hid in two bushels of chaff. You shall seek all dav ere you find them, and when you have them they are not worth the search.” In conclusion. I affirm that the council m the past has acted on the advice of the eno-meer and its future policy must also be guided (by the engineer—at least, that is my view. Finally, the camaraderie evidenced by the engineer still exists, I hope.—l am, etc., IV. G. SIMPSON. Hawera, July 26.