THE H.B. TRIBUNE. MONDAY, MARCH 22, 1920. HARBOUR DUES.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume X, Issue 84, 22 March 1920, Page 4

THE H.B. TRIBUNE. MONDAY, MARCH 22, 1920. HARBOUR DUES.

When our Napier evening contemporary first made reference to tne Chairman’s recent statement with regard to the Harbour works in’con tempiation by the Napier Harbour Board it characterised his presentation of the rating aspect of the ease as being ’‘disingenuous.” It is not necessary to search the lexicon to find a much more emphatic word that will be appropriate to the attitude adopted by our contemporary on the same subject. In its Saturday’s issue it makes an attempt to answer, or rather to dodge, the previous uay s complete refutation in tins column of its earlier inisrepre seiitations with regard to trie Hoard s rating powers relative to tne loan now proposed, it was there shown that, without anj suaaow of doubt, tne board has no general rating power, and that tne specific aiiUiorities in that direction eomerred upon it are strictly limited to an annual amount sufficient to meet int-rest and sinking funds on the balances still outstanding of the tv. o loans raised many years ago for Breakwater construction. Our contemporary has not now, as rwould anyone desirous ot .discussing the project on its merits, Hie honesty to admit its so patent mistake, or mis-statement. Un the contrary, by reference to a suppositious power such as it had previously declared to be actually existent,, it seeks to save its face irom inc inevitable consequences of a gross and unpardonable misrepresentation fully exposed. So, brushing aside the matter of rating power of which it has made such unjustifiable misuse, it proceeds to a rehash of its previous contentions with regard to the effects of the increased shipping dues which it says iwill require to be levied in order to meet the interest and sinking fund on the loan now proposed. Its whole effort, however, amounts to a mere repetition of its grotesquely harrowing story of Hawke’s Bay consumers having ultimately to provide the amount with a- compound profit of 3.3 per cent, first to wholesale importers and then to retail distributors

[ At the outset cur contempoorary starts off to bolster up its wholly i false argument with a false premise ! bv quoting figures applicable to a 1 iloan ot £300,000, whereas the ! amount is only £250,000, whatever 1 responsibility there may be as to £50,000 of the £300,000 originally outhorised having been already in curred. However, let us adopt its own largely exaggerated figures, by which it arrives at an extra yearly outgoing for interest am: sinking-fund of £18,750. Having built up this unsound foundation, it then proceeds to two simple antb metical calculations— carried out. by the way, with quite unusilal approximate correctness —by which it she* that, assuming first the importer and then the retailer to reckon Im, I selling price at an advance of 33 pe--cent, on his buying price, the con suming public, will in the end hiiAe to pay, in the increased prices of commodities, some £3.3,000 in order 4o provide the extra £18.750 required by the Board. But onr eon temporary, though having obviously read and considered what has appeared in the “Tribune on the question, wilfully suppresses any reference to the new credits that wit. have, to be put against this new debit. In the first place, as haalready been pointed out here, th<lighterage charges 1 that have now tu be paid, on both inward and *>ut ward cargoes, by the big liner.that visit the port will be, saved to the community’ as a whole. As these lightermen’s charges now amount b> something like £20,000 a year ih<£18.750 is more than wiped out by this one item of saving alone. Lt may be said that this item has reference more to - exports than to imports and that therefore the consumers of imported goods do noircap all or even half the benefit oi its abolition. But when lighterage is done away with the big liners wih be very glad, in view of the much more rapid dispatch in both unloa ing and loading, to pay in harbou) dues the equivalent of what they have hitherto paid for lighterage. Then, as the number and tonnage oi ships using the new quay accommodation increases—an absolutelyassured element in the discussion—the clues can be proportionately re duced. Then our contemporary wfftuiiy shuts its own eyes, and declines to open those of its readers, to the tact that under present conditions consumers, on the lines of its awn argument, are in another way paying everv year vastly more than the m terest and sinking fund on the proposed loan. As things now are by far and away the larger proportion of our total imported commodities is brought to our port by coastal dis tributing craft to which height, from one or other of the P olt ' accessible to ocean liners, has to be paid, as well as the cost o ivo handlings that would be avoided were the liners able to tie up at the Napier quav. That this tax on the consumer—with, of course, our contemporary’s compounded o 3 p< 1 cent added—must be a very liberal multiple of the amount required to pav interest and sinking-fund on the proposed loan no one can gainsay. Thus we have the consumer profiting, instead of being penalised, by the expenditure now m contemplation. Finally, there, is, as has also been more than once pointed out here, the immensely important item of reclaimed land. It is. o course,, impossible to say, with anything like accuracy, what the ]<ri acres of new reclamation, winch wi be effected virtually .without cost, will bring in by way of new revenue to the Board. It is, however, quite safe to sav that within a very short time it iwill be, sufficient to enable a very substantial reduction in rates, if not to enable their total abolition, while in the not very far away future, as the life jf a port goes, it will constitute one of the chiet. if not the chief, item in the Board ‘ income. Thus, if the people ot Hawke’s Bay will only trouble—as so fe,w are inclined to doy-to look for themselves into existing tacts and well assured prospects, they will iee. that, instead of their burdens being increased, they will be very substantially and progressively reduced by the institution of a modern harbour to serve ocean-going vessels, as well as providing, at the same time, accommodation for the smaller craft for which alone we can now cater.