RESCINDED

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume 59, Issue 4289, 9 June 1950, Page 4

RESCINDED

WATER DECISION . PLAINS COUNCIL QUESTION OF SUBSjgJES DISCUSSION BY COUNCILLORS A notice of motion that the resolution, passed at a special meeting of the council held on May 9, when it was decided to. abandon the Waitawheta water supply scheme and in its place harness the streams on the Western side of the Plains, be rescinded and that the council make ho decision until the Government subsidies for such schemes were defined; was tabled by Cr D. G. McMillan at the June meeting of the Hauraki Plains County Council. A letter from the Paeroa Borough Council on' the same subject was as under:— “I have to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated May 16 advisingthat your council would not now ibeproceeding with negotiations in eon-, nection with the Waitawheta wateji scheme. This was placed before'w special meeting of my council held recently, when it was received with, considerable surprise.

“Following a full discussion, it was •_ agreed that further immediate action • in connection with the proposed water scheme be deferred until your council has had an opportunity to 3 reconsider its decision. It was further agreed that the matter be re-' opened for discussion at the meeting to be held on Thursday, July 13 next.”

Cr McMillan said his reason for j serving the notice of motion was that the decision should not have been. confirmed until the question of sub-‘<; sidies was finalised. He thought council should find out which schemer 4 the Government favoured and then £ the council could decide which scheme < should be adopted. ■ Cr W. H. Cheale seconded thnj notice of motion. He had been prised when the vote had been so suddenly to cut out the Waitawheta scheme in view of the negotw ations in train with file Borough Council. He referred to the trouble 'being inexperienced in thequality of the water from the west supply. He did not think the water from Waitawheta would give the ‘ same cause for complaint, as - from the western streams. The Vol- -< ume of water from Waitawheta much greater than could ever be secur- 11 ed from the western streams. He had J had a number of ratepayers ask him. why the council had turned down Waitawheta scheme. V4S

Cr. L. W. Schultz supported the> notice of motion and he was support*. ed by Cr. W. Hayward; Cr. F. Pinchess said the motion for J the division was because .the Paeroa ‘ Borough Council were pressing thagj council for a definite answer. The chairman, Mr C. W. supported the notice of motion agree**ing that the proposal hinged on??? the question of subsidies available f from the Government as the main. ] point,. otherwise the money would < have to come from other sources. •

Cr. J. F. Mayn also supported the notice of motion saying he really favoured the Waitawheta scheme. He thought the notice of motion was the proper step for the council to take. He thought the council had been tfb little hasty in its decision.

Cr. T. O’Carroll said he would re* frain from voting on the question but he thought the western streams. 4 proposal would eventually be the enjitadopted.

When a vote was taken the notice of motion was carried.

It was decided that the water committee meet the Paeroa Borough Council to discuss the question of the quantity of water available from the Waitawheta scheme for the Plains.