MANAWATU-OROUA RIVER BOARD’S SCHEME OF FLOOD CONTROL

Manawatu Times, Volume LIV, Issue 6851, 5 March 1929, Page 5

MANAWATU-OROUA RIVER BOARD’S SCHEME OF FLOOD CONTROL

Support Refused By i Manawatu Drainage Board j WHOLE THING A FARCE, i SAYS TRUSTEE A. GUY| Following the Tecent decision of the Manawatu drainage board to hold over the question of supjiorting. the Manawatu river board's request for Government subsidy on its modified scheme of flood c-ontrol, a deputation from the river board waited upon the drainage board at its meeting yesterday in an endeavour to persuade the latter body to adopt a different attitude and support the river board in its representations to the Government. After hearing the deputation, however, the drainage board decided on a show of hands, to take no further action in the matter, and not to appoint any delegate to the river board’s deputation which will wait upon the Government to ask for a subsidy. In the unavoidable absence of Mr AV. S. Carter, chairman of the river board, Mr A. Seifert laid the case before the meeting. Mr F. S. Hay, who drew up the modified scheme for the river board and who is its engineer, accompanied Mr Seifert. Scheme Would Be a Success, Addressing members of the board, Mr.Seifert said that the river board earnestly desired their, support in the proposed •'deputation. The Manawatu drainage board was an interested body and their support would carry considerable weight. . They would all agree with him that any scheme which could prevent the flooding of the Manawatn would be of the greatest benefit to the district as a whole. The river board’s scheme was designed to this end, but they felt that they could not ask the ratepayers to bear the whole of the cost of the work. They were prepared, however, to stand half the cost, | and it was for tho purpose of obtaining tho other half from the Government that they were organising the deputation. As far as tho practicability of the scheme was concerned, a double check would be kept on the engineer’s estimates by the fact that before anything could be dona, the Publie AVorks Department would have to be satisfied that the scheme was workable, and that the cost of the work would not exceed the estimates. For tho rest, he could assure them that local bodies as such were not being asked to contribute.. All that was asked was the board’s representation on the deputation to tho Government. If this subsidy was obtained, the other half of the cost would be borne by the rating of the areas concerned according to classification. Practically every other local body concerned had promised its support and he therefore asked that the board should regard their request sympathetically* Mr Hay stated that the total estimated cost of the scheme was £300,000, and the average rate imposed would be 3s 9d per acre. The land would probably be classified into six different classes for rating purposes, in order that the cost might be distributed as equitably as possible in regard to the benefits conferred. At the present stage he could not say what the highest rate per acre would be, but personally he thought it would not be more than 6s while the lowest would be about Is. There were about 60,000 acres available for rating purposes. Mr. Hay then outlined to the board the main principles of his scheme and answered a number of questions in connection with it.

Trustee E. AVood stated that_ any scheme for the relief of flooding in the Manawatu should meet with a sympathetic reception from the board. AVhat they did not want to do was to put their hands in their pockets. Mr Seifert: AVe are not asking you to do so.

Before withdrawing Mr Seifert stated that the configuration of the land between Palmerston North and Foxton made it evident that nature would assist the carrying out of the seheme. Personally he felt that it would be wonderfully successful. No Support Forthcoming.

AVhen tho deputation had withdrawn, Trustee ELiott moved that, on the grounds that the sehomo would prove of material benefit to the board’s ratepayers, it should support the Mana-watu-Oroua board’s modified scheme. The scheme would make £2500 available for the floodgate at Rangfotu and would include the stop bank on the Oroua.

Trustee Guy strongly opposed, Trustee Eliott’s motion. By appointing delegates to the proposed deputation they would be tacitly approving the scheme. If they did this, they were going quite beyond their function. The (board was constituted to control its own area and not to support schemes for diverting the Manawatu. If they sent a delegate to the deputation, they were practically pledging their ratepayers to the expenditure of a big sum of money. It was a one man schemo which would benefit half a dozen ratepayers. The whole thing had been a farce from the beginning.

Trustee Eliott: I think we can multiply Trustee Guy’s half dozen by ten.

The chairman of the board, Trustee P. .J. Small, stated that anybody who had studied the matter would be convinced that the control of the Manawatu should bo a national affair. There was no doubt that the time would come when the board would he under tho obligation to protect its ratepayers in its lower areas. There was at present a very Teal menace in the encroachment of the Oroua river while last flood, thousands of acres of the board’s area had been under water.

Trustee Collis expressed the opinion that the rates falling upon settlers might be much heavier than anticipat-

ed. The board did not know to what it was committing itself. After some further discussion Trustee Guy moved that the board should take no further action in the matter. "We should stick to our guns,” said the mover. "The thing is ridiculous. No tidal Tiver as large as the Mannwatu river has ever been diverted. Trustee "Wood seconded the motion. On tho motion being put .to tho meeting live trustees voted for it wliilo Trustees Eliott and Small made up the "noes.” "I want my vote recorded against the resolution because I am convinced that as time goes on the board will realise that it should have done something,” were tho words with which the chairman concluded the discussion.