POWER LICENSE

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume 60, Issue 4342, 11 October 1950, Page 8

POWER LICENSE

WHANGAMATA SUPPLY

GRANT TO PRIVATE COY.

NO OBJECTION FROM BOARD

There is apparently every possibility that a license to generate electricity and supply current to the residents of Whangamata may be granted by the Government to private operators and the matter

became a subject of much discussion at the October meeting of the Thames Valley Electric-Power Board held recently in Te Aroha. A letter addressed to the board giving a report of a meeting held recently in Whangamata stated'— “Recently a meeting was held at Whangamata convened by a Mr Leach and partner, who claimed to have a license to produce electrical power for Whangamata. When asked where the Thames Valley board came in, + hey said it had no claim in Whangamata and if Mr Leash and his partner could get 200 signatures out of the 1200 section holders they would install a Diesel plant.” The letter went out to state that a guarantee of £l2 a year for 21 years, together with the sole right to all electrical installations was required by the private firm. A further meeting was to be held in Whangamata and the writer said that he would like to be advised if the partners could enforce a rate on nonconsumers and he would also like to be advised as to the board’s charges for current.

In replying the board enclosed a copy of a letter from the generalmanager of the State Hydro-Electric Department, which was self explanatory. The letter from the department said that it seemed very likely that an application for a license authorising the supply of electricity in Whangamata would be received from Mr Leash or some concern with which he was connected. The letter asked that the department be advised as to the prospects of supply by the board. It would be helpful if the board’s attitude towards the application could be indicated and whether the board would like any special terms and conditions embodied in any license granted. Any such license would, of course, be subject to the board’s option to purchase contained in the Electrical Supply Regulation 27-14.

The chairman, Mr J. F. Mayn, drew the attention of members to the report on the position which had been placed before each member of the board.

Could the board give the Whangamata residents any idea as to when the board could make power available? asked Mir E. Jamieson. The settlers wanted the power and wanted to know the cost per unit and whether prices would be increased in two or three years’ time. The Whangamata people did not wish to lose an opportunity of getting power and did ndt wish to find themselves in the position of having turned down the present offer from the private concern to still find themselves without power. No Undertaking Possible

No undertaking could possibly ibe given, said the chairman, who pointed out that it was not merely a question of power being available. There was also the question of the guarantee and whether it would be a payable proposition to supply Whangamata. No guarantee could be given by the board that the supply would be made available to Whangamata.

Mr Edwin Edwards said that all the settlers required to know was whether with power available and satisfactory guarantees given, the board would give the supply. Surely, said Mr Edwards, the board would favourably consider such an application. It was not quite so simple as that as the board had to consider whether, though there might be power available at one particular time the board might be overcommitting itself argued the chairman.

If the settlers had an opportunity of securing power then let them seize that opportunity, said Mr A. E Wrigley, who thought the board should not make any objection to the application for a license which had been made by the private concern. Mr G. P. Lindsay, chief engineer, pointed out that there was a claim by Coromandel for electrical supply. Mr H. L. Boughton urged caution as the board would be faced later with the purchase of the plant at a later date. A different view was taken by Mir Lindsay, who said that' a private operator could operate a Diesel plant much more cheaply than the board. The private operator would have to use standard equipment in the construction of all electrical appliances and the depreciation was heavy and he did

not think the board would have to pay an unfair price in talking over the plant and assets at some future date. Mr W. A. Rushton moved that the board make no objection to the installation of the plant 'so long as it was erected in accordance with the regulations. The motion was carried unanimously.