AWANUI HARBOUR BILL

Northland Age, Volume 25, Issue 15, 6 August 1925, Page 3

AWANUI HARBOUR BILL

MEETING AT VICTORIA V \ T-EY. PROPOSAL NEGATIVED. A meeting to re-discuss the question of forming an Awanui Harbour Board convened by the Kaitaia Chamber of Commerce the promoters of the Bill was held in the Memorial Hall, Victoria Valley, on July 30th. About thirty ratepayers were present, representing Fairburn and Takahue as well as the Valley. Messrs. F. Banks and D. Archibald vice presidents and C. B. Michie, secretary, represented the Chamber. Mr. E. Panther was appointed chairman and in opening outlined the objects of the meeting. He then called on the delegates to address the meeting.

Mr. Banks, speaking for the Chamber apologised for Mr. Kenny’s absence, and pointed out that the Chamber had already stated its case at meetings previously convened in various centres and the support met with was almost unanimous. This support was not now forthcoming in view of objections being raised. The delegates would like to hear these objections first. Mr. Morey then outlined the position as it appeared to him as one with considerable experience on a Harbour Board. His chief objections were that the district was too small in area to warrant forming a Board. It should include the whole county. The tonnage coming into Awanui would not earn sufficient revenue to keep the office in ink. If the Board were formed it would immediately have to recondition all wharves and sheds taken over. This without funds in hand would necessitate imposing a harbour rate upon the already over burdened ratepayers. This brought the speaker to a further q[jjection, namely, that the Bill provided the levying of rates up to one farthing in the pound on capital value in the area without a poll of ratepayers. Further than this, Mr. Morey asserted that a special harbour improvement rate could be levied with the sanction of the Minister for Marine. Again, there was the annual cost of cleaning the channel buoys which, according to the speaker, would require special plant to deal with. He estimated that it would cost at least fifty pounds per year for cleaning the buoys. The next speaker was Mr. O. Fisher who also opposed the Bill and thought that a peculiar position had arisen in the meeting in that whereas the settlers had come expecting further information, the delegates seemed anxious to hear the objections. He thought the propercourse would be for the delegates to speak and let the meeting discuss any fresh matter thus brought to light. Mr. C. Michie then stated the case for the Chamber and in outlining the present movement from its commencement the speaker referred to reported activity which occurred a few years ago in an attempt to establishing a port some miles from Awanui where, in the opinion of many, including the speaker, it was very unsuitable and inconvenient to the district generally. A survey had been made and a report favourable to this site submitted to Wellington, but few of the ratepayers appeared to know anything of the matter. But without definite information in this, the Chamber did not regard the matter seriously. However, they received a copy of a letter from the Minister to an individual having interests in the district, confirming previous reports by stating that, "experts consider that the needs of the district would be better served were the

wharf placed at the junction of the ManChamber then decided that a move should be qjide to place the development of the Awamn cr elsewhere under the of a H -rbour Hoard. On receipt leftSc the Chamber had requested further information as td who the experts were whose opinions had been obtained, at whose request they inspected the channels in question, and also to be favoured I with a copy of the experts’ reports. None of this information had been given to the Chamber. Proceeding, the speaker emphasised the fact that before any definite action in promoting a Bill was taken the advice of experts was obtained to be sure that the Awanui harbour development was practicable. Messrs. J. Blair Mason and John Wood, two well known authorities on harbour matters, had made inspections and furnished reports. Copies of these reports were then read to the meeting and attention drawn to the agreement of both experts separately as to the best site met with. It was also pointed out that Mr. Wood, in his report, stated that ”Lo«l interests are best looked after by local people” and suggested forming a Harbour Board. The Chamber had not tried to force the Bill on the ratepayers against their wishes, therefore, to ascertain the twusure of support in the district held at Awanui, Takahue, Victoria Valley and Fairburn. Among the ratepayers present at tffbse meetings only one dissentient vote was experienced. Therefore they felt justified in concluding that they had the district behind them and proceeded with the Bill, which would have gone through last session without a pro-

test from the settlers, but for opposition inthe House resulting in its being held over till this session. The raising of objections at 'he eleventh hour placed the Qkamber in a difficult position after having gone to considerable trouble and ex- . pense in the matter. * Dealing with Mr. Morey’s objections, Mr. Michie stated that it was not the object of the promoters that expenditure should be incurred immediately. The Board itself would not be an expensive institution and could watch harbour interests in the meantime until district devel. opment warrants harbour improvement. The Kaitaia Town Board furnished an example of what good work could be done 4, by a small body with limited funds. As

to low tonnai e entering Awanui, figures increased from 4536 tons in 1918 to 7288 in 1923. thus 1 early doubling in five years. It was reasonable to count on 10.000 tons shortly. A charge of 6d per ton harbour dues would produce £250 revenue which would leave a good balance after cleaning the buoys, even at Mr. Morey’s estimate, which he thought was too high. He also thought that special plant could be done without at pieseut. As to cost of repairing wharves, Mr. Michie asked where the County Council gets the money from to repair the wharves under the present arrangement. The ratepayer still pays for it. With reference to levying a rate, the speaker stated that he understood that no rale could be levied without the sanction of the ratepayers. Reference to the text of the Bill proved this to be a mistake. ' Mr. F. Banks then spoke supporting the ' Bill. In reply to Mr. Morey, he would j state that harbour dues would produce ; enough ink to float a steamer. They could find the happy medium between the two guesses and it would be about correctThe running of a Board would not be costly as he believed the port at Awanui would continue to serve the district for many years to come. It was not reasonable to snggest combining the Eastern Area in the Awanui Bill since they represented a separate centre of interest, and a difficult or unfair situations could arise with such a scheme. Mr. Archibald also supported the Bill and detailed advantages which would accrue to the settlers and business men alike by having the port under separate author- i ity. Mr. Fisher, in speaking against the Bill, | said that up to a certain point both parties j agreed. They ' were unanimous that I where improvement in administration j could be effected it should be done and j they would be willing to join forces with j the Chamber to correct matters, but with the Harbour Bill as a means of achieving this object they strongly disagreed as an unnecessarily cumbersome and expensive measure.

Mr. John Dawson said he was opposed to the Bill. It was all right for Awanui and Kaitaia. If they wanted it let them have it, but not to ask Fairburns, Victoria Valley and Takahue to help pay for it. These jentres formed a very important part of the district and being farming communities were already over burdened by taxation and rates. Therefore, he asked, did not Mr. Michie think that since they were not interested in the harbour they should be excluded from the Area instead of being asked to pay for something they don’t want. Replying, Mr. Michie reminded the previous speaker that these districts use Awanui almost exclusively as their port •therwise they would have been excluded, like Herekino, which was left out because •f their own harbour serving them to some extent. Being admittedly important districts, and thus users of the port, it was unreasonable to ask Awanui and Kaitaia to provide them with a free harbour, yet exclude them from contributing to its maintenance. Further remarks against the Bill were made and questions asked by Messrs. Morey, Fisher, Wright, Kitchen and J. Stuart. Mr. Morey then proposed, and Mr. Fisher seconded, “That the petitions now being signed be proceeded with.” The chairman (Mr. Panther) added a few remarks before putting the motion. He felt that they had all been skirmishing

round the real point at issue. The settlers already have a heavy load of taxation and on top of heavy county rates there wete coming drainage rates and perhaps a further hospital rate and now a harbour rate was talked of and they were justly alarmed. He did not question the sincerity of the promoters of the Bill, but he sympathised with those now opposing any further impost upon the already struggling ratepayers. The motion was put and carried unanimously. Twenty-four votes being recorded Mr. Morey proposed a hearty vote of thanks to the delegates, which was replied to by Mr. Banks, who thanked all present for the courteous hearing accorded the delegates. Though feeling was strong, and speakers were frank, a very friendly spirit pervaded the meeting from its commencement till it closed at 10.30 p.m. The petition now being circulated is a protest against inclusion in the Awanui Harbour District, and will be forwarded to the Minister of Marine through the member for the district.