DRAINAGE SCHEME RATE

Northland Age, Volume 2, Issue 5, 5 February 1930, Page 4

DRAINAGE SCHEME RATE

BURDEN DISTRICT CAN BEAR. DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE’S ENQUIRY. LARGE VOLUME OF EVIDENCE. Sitting, without representation of the settlers affected, to determine the burden of rating which the Kaitaia Drainage District can bear in connection with the capital cost and maintenance of the swamp drainage scheme, the departmental committee of enquiry held its' sittings yesterday and to-day, last night hearing the case of the town area landowners. Commencing at 10.30 a.m. yesterday, the sitting continued until 3.30 p.m. and, hearing the town deputations last evening, resumed again this morning. Following is the personnel of the committee : Mr. R, G. McMorraH, Chief Drainage Engineer (chairman); Mr. A. C. Sutherland, who was Government appointee for the classification of the lands in the drainage area; and Mr. A. F. Blackburn, Valuation Department nominee for assessment of the unimproved value of the county lands.

“Following the representations made last October by the Drainage Committee the Minister ot Lands decided to appoint this committee,” stated Mr McMorrSn (chairman). “The main point for consideration is the loading which the district should bear, wh’ch some years ago was decided at f 110,000. Various representations . have been made to various Ministers that the load suggested was more than the district could stand. The object of this meeting is to take any evidence brought before us, weigh your statements, and if necessary inspect the land, and report to the department. This is purely a departmental committee, not a commission. And in taking evidence from ratepayers it is our intentios to put them on oath.” Drainage Committee’s Case. “We propose to deal with the drainage scheme from its start,” stated Mr. T. S. Houston, chairman of the Drainage Committee. “The remark may be made ‘Why, near the end of the scheme do we wake up and find the job has been unsatisfactory for a long time ?’ 1 wish you to note that the Drainage Association registered that opinion long before this, but no notice was taken.” The then Minister of Lands, the Hon. Mr. Guthrie, had promised tcrhold an enquiry, but it had not been held, Mr. Guthrie considering the position did.not warrant such a step ; and Mr. Houston contended that had that enquiry been held then the cost of the scheme would not be what it was to-day. The whole original scheme was an outlet for the swamp, the opening ot the main outfall drain, and that i*.ad been backed by the whole district. The drainage association had given place to the Kaitaia Drainage Board, and up to that time there had been no extra expense, the scheme outlined by the Drainage Association and the board being only the opening up of the outfall drain. The Government took over the whole thing but gave no local representation. A protest had been registered at the time that the ratepayers who had to pay were entitled to some representation, but since .the days of the drainage board there had been no local representation.

“We contend,” said Mr. Houston, “that, the first scheme having been altered without consent, had a vote been taken in the district with the huge expenditure in view, it would most

decidedly have been turned down.” l'tie residents had lodged objections, contending the cost was more than the benefit to be received and that the proposal was far too elaborate to make the scheme a payable success. The residents’ contention that if a business was started and not built up to pay interest, it was a failure; and it was unfair to try to make the land owners make up the deficiency on the drainage scheme. When the Government took over the scheme it had been decided to try employing natives on day labour, and quite a big expense had been incurred, the native gangers not giving in correct times, and there had been a tremendous waste of money, with the result that to-day the settlers were saddled with extra expense. That the scheme had not been a success was proved by the facts that floods had not been eliminated and that not one Government section on the swamp had been thrown open tor selection, if the scheme had been a success, Mr. Houston asked, why had those Government sections not been thrown open for settlement ? This proved the department knew the scheme was not a success. Why had those sections, or the best of them, not been thrown open when there were land-hungry people, not only in this district but in other parts, waiting for land ?' “I think that shows the department knows there is something wrong somewhere,” stated Mr. Houston. The biggest proportion of Government land in the swamp was classified A, similar land being held by natives, and through low unimproved value the rate on such land was small, B Class land having to carry the heaviest rate. That was why it was contended the full rate and maintenance would be more than the district could pay, and there was no doubt several people would have to leave their farms. [Concluded in next Issue.]