SUPPLY OF POWER

Northern Advocate, 25 October 1935, Page 11

SUPPLY OF POWER

“AN INNOCENT BILL” MEMBERS’ MISUNDERSTANDING GOVERNMENT CONTROL DENIED. [From Our Parliamentary Special.] WELLINGTON, This Day. The Minister qf Public Works, Hon, J. Bitchener, announced in the House of Representatives /yesterday the deletion of all reference to the control of electrical supplies from the Public Works Amendment Bill.

Members are quite agreeable to this, as many of them thought that the original bill contained a threat to local bodies and supply authorities. Mr Bitchener said that these sections had been taken from the bill because it was anticipated that there would be strong opposition, and because the Government intended next session to consolidate the law relating to electrical supplies. Nothing sinister had been concealed in the bill, and the Government had no intention of trying to get a monopoly so far as electrical supplies was concei'ned. Much- Legislation Needed.

MTr J. A. Nash (Government—Palmerston North) said a great deal of legislation was needed to deal with the electrical supply. The power boards and supply authorities had been asking for it for some time, and it was indeed fortunate that there was not enough time left in the present session to deal with the matter. Mr D. G. Sullivan (Labour—Avon): “The local authorities have''had a very narrow escape, and it is amazing that the Public Works Department and the Minister even considered imposing such conditions as those contemplated in the bill.”

The Prime Minister, Mr Forbes, asked Mr Sullivan if he believed or not in State control. Members Worried.

Mr Sullivan: “The Prime Minister’s remark is laughable, in view of the present administration of the State he should remember also that local bodies are representative of the people.”

Mr Forbes admitted that this was the case “sometimes.”

Mr M, J. Savage (Leader of the Opposition) said that many members had been worried about the contents of the original bill, and most members had received telegrams about the proposed legislation from local authorities throughout the country. Mr Sullivan said that in the present case local bodies had as much or mere money invested than the Government itself. Some of the local bodies which had been considering the extension of their supplementary plant for the purpose of meeting the best interests of the consumers would apparently have been deprived cl' doing' so. The Government could not only have appropriated new plant, but it could have put cut of existence any_ existing plant. Bill Misunderstood. The Minister denied that this was the intention of the Government. Mr Sullivan asked the Minister why the Government had wanted to take the power to make it so.

Mr Bitchener said he was very sorry that his bill had been misunderstood by metnbers. It was one of the

most innocent and reasonable bills imaginable. The Government was not like some others. It did not try‘to make huge profits, and it was better to supply customers of the State at a nominal cost than to build up great reserves at their expense. The Government was doing its best tc encourage consumption of electricity, and had always done its best to supply the local authorities. In one year the department had paid £BO,OOO, so as to assist the northern standby plant.