Ratepayers Prepare For Hatea Wafer Discussions

Northern Advocate, 6 May 1949, Page 4

Ratepayers Prepare For Hatea Wafer Discussions

“WE cannot pull down a scheme if we cannot provide an alternative,” said Mr C. J. Homer at the monthly meeting of the Whangarei Borough Ratepayers and Residents’ Association last night, when discussion was taking place on the visit next week of two officials of the Board of Health, who will receive and discuss all objections to the Hatea water scheme. At the outset the president (Mr S. Hartnell) briefly outlined events culminating in the officials’ visit. “Fourteen months ago a letter of protest was sent to the Minister of Health in connection with the present borough water supply from the Hatea River.

“Hatea was brought in as an emergency water supply for the borough, and, almost immediately, meetings of protest against the state of the water were held by ratepayers—mostly those in the north end of the town. Councillors explained why the emergency supply was used and that it was only used for ■ three or four months in the summer. “After two seasons endeavours were made, with some success, t- make the water drinkable and last season there was not so much objection to it. “Protest had died down, but this association, which is representative of the ratepayers and residents of the borough, hammered at the Hatea water supply. Once we had almost all he ratepayers behind us. “Now we shall have to justify our )bjections.” he concluded. LETTER OF PROTEST The secretary (Mr H. W. Young) read the lengthy letter c: protest. An explanation of why protests had died off in connection with the water was given by Mr S. C. Crawford, who said that people had decided they had to put up with it. “Many have installed tanks, and several carry water from the southern epd of the borough,” he said. Commenting on the Maunu supply,

Mrs K. Pointon said that if it were to collapse the borough would be without water. “Why not bring an auxiliary supply into the borough, linking up Crystal Springs ? ” she asked. 500,000 GALLONS DAILY “Whangarei wants 500,000 gallons of water a day. If wc brought in a supply from Kamo it would still leave a shortage and, anyway, Kamo, if it comes into the borough, will require most from its own source,” said Mr Homer. The council did not want too many small supplies, as they were too difficult to maintain. t “When the Maunu supply was brought in it was supposed to provide water for 25,000 people; at least that was never disputed until just recently,” said Mr A.. Fawcett. “Whangarei would have the best water supply in New Zealand if half the money spent on inspecting possible supplies at Poroti was used at Maunu, All that is wrong is that the pipes are too small.” LEAKAGES ?

The fact that Whangarei had the highest daily water consumption per person for New Zealand, was mentioned by Mrs Pointon, who said that obviously something was wrong‘with the supply and all possible sources of leakages should be investigated. In a recent investigation of the Maunu supply, the car in which she had been driven had travelled through water because of leakages from the pipes. “After a ballot had been taken on the Hatea question the council must have gone in direct defiance' to the ratepayers. Knowing the council as I do it must have had some justification for its actions,” said Mr P. G. Shepherd.

“We do not want to go to this meeting on Wednesday with the idea that the council is there just to defy us. When the council acted, it was in an emergency, and it took the best course available. “We should go with understanding.” “INACCURACIES” Attention was drawn by Mr Homer to the fact that the poll of ratepayers on the Hatea water question was not to decide whether the supply would be brought into being, but to determine whether a loan should be sanctioned. “This proposal was turned down, and the council had to pay it out of revenue. At the time of the poll the scheme was already operating. “There .has been some misunderstanding. The council is not against the ratepayers. The council is giving them every assistance to raise objections. “In the letter sent to the Minister of Health, there were a lot of inaccuracies, and I would advise you to read it carefully and to go to the meeting with the idea of cooperating.” Mr Homer said that he had been against the Hatea water scheme all the time, but, unless there was an alternative, the scheme could not be pulled down. CAN BE IMPROVED “Many things in the supply can be improved—like the filter beds—and if this association puts its objections very clearly it will get a good hearing. These health officials are here only to see that a good water supply is obtained.” He emphasised the fact that the Hatea scheme was only a temporary one, and the council was awaiting full information about the proposed Whau Valley scheme. Mr Hartnell said that the water was wanted for fire-fighting purposes and it was impossible to get another supply as plentiful in a short time. “If the health officials decide the water is unfit for human consumption, then a new supply will have to be found,” said Mr F. Moore. Mrs Pointon and Messrs Crawford, Hartnell and Young were nominated delegates to meet the health officials, and to place the association’s objections before them.