RIVER DIVERSION AT WHIROKINO

Manawatu Times, Volume 61, Issue 47, 26 February 1936, Page 5

RIVER DIVERSION AT WHIROKINO

Request Made to Government For Assistance

MINISTER WANTS GREATER UNANIMITY

The Manawatu-Oroua River Board’s proposal to make a cut in the Mauawatu river at Whirokino, from Long Reach .to Hartley's Bend, providing quicker access to the sea for flood waters, was the subject of a request for financial assistance which was placed before the Minister of Public Works (Hon. R. Semple) when he was an Foxton yesterday. The Minister accompanied board members by launch up the river to tue scene of the proposed work, six miles from Foxton, and after having matters explained to him, during which it was obvious that there is some opposition to the proposal, advised the board to hold a poll of the ratepayers to see whether they are in favour of it approaching the Government with a view to the latter assisting financially. The cut would be a mile in length and would shorten the course of the river by five miles.

“It seems that you want me to act as referee,” said the Minister after hearing arguments both for and against the cut. “You can only get a proper decision by a poll of the people.”

Mr. W. fci. Carter, a member of the board, said the cut would lead to closer settlement of the district. There were only three or four big people opposing it; the majority of the ratepayers wanted it. People higher up the river had banked at the expense of Moutoa. rviakerua would benefit from the proposed cut because the getaway of the water would be facilitated, the pressure of the water on its banks would be decreased and the period of flooding would be reduced by days. Mr. M. J 3. Bergin, representing persons opposing the cut, asked Mr. Carter his authority for the latter statement, and was told by Mr. J. Wood, acting-ingineer-in-chief of the Public Works Department, that it was correct. Mr. M. Perreau (Mayor of Boston) informed the Minister that the Foxton Borough Council was frightened that the cut might affect the sewerage system.

“I am afraid you will have to do something to get a greater measure of unanimity,” the Minister said to Mr. A. A. Mitchell (chairman of the board). “Unless you have that, I am not going to take the responsibility for the Government spending thousands of pounds. Take a referendum of the people. I want some definite, concrete opinion that it will benefit the district.”

Mr. J. Chrystall (chairman of the Moutoa Drainage Board): That is exactly what Mr. Coates said. Mr. Semple: It is not often that Mr. Coates and I are in agreement. (Laughter.)

When the party returned to Foxton, Mr. Mitchell asked the Minister to suggest a course of action for the board.

“I would want to know the actual cost and what is involved in the whole scheme that the River Board has/’ replied Mr. Semple. “Mr. Wood told me that the cut was only part of a major scheme. I am not going to commit the Government to the expenditure of money unless I know the cost and what benefit tho work will result in.’’ Mr. Wood told the Minister that the board’s whole scheme, as modified, would cost in the vicinity of £300,000. “I would not spend that money unless I got value created/’ said the Minister. ‘ ‘ When the community is spending the money, I want to make sure chat the community is getting the benefit. The way it is now, with opposition to the scheme —to what extent I do not know—it seems that tho board should take a vote, and then the Government can go into the matter with you from a business point of view.’’ Mr. Carter said that the board had 1,500,000 acres of watershed to contend with, but had no control until the water came into its territory. The cut that was proposed would enable the water to get out to sea quicker and would be tho nucleus of the board’s big scheme. Anything done after the cut was put in would improve individual properties. “I can see you have a tremendous problem here/’ said the Minister. “1 want an assurance that there will be some return for the money we spend.’’ Mr. Carter: Unless the cut is done by the Government, it won’t be done for many years.

Mr. Wood pointed out that the cut was an essential feature 0- the board’s scheme, and the board must give some guarantee that it would go on with the rest of the scheme if the cut were made. The Minister closed the discussion by reiterating that the board should take a poll of the ratepayers to see whether they favoured the cut being done.