POWER BOARD CHARGES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19927, 21 April 1928, Page 14

POWER BOARD CHARGES.

Sir, —The scene is a small city office, wherein the staff is busily toiling. Enter a meter reader. "No units consumed,' ho announces. "Thank goodness," sighs the manager, striving to keep down overhead. "Yes, that will, be nine shillings" —and the meter reader departs hurriedly. The white slip left says the period is from December 12 till February 16; units none; minimum charge totals 7s 6d; standing monthly charge, Is 6d; total, 9s— a nd if I should refuse to give them nine shillings for nothing they can put me in the dock. If the autocratic power board will not alter this charge or satisfactorily explain it, then I for -one am willing to give time to organise a protest that, if the position is as I think it, should be effective in making them do so. Light.

Sir,—-I entirely agree with "J.R.R." We have been long instructed and sermonised on the wonderful benefits of electric light and power, but many consumers are now regretting that they did not scent the "arbitrary exactions" before linking up with the power and light supply as at present controlled. Private enterprise has, perhaps, many faults and imperfections, but, in the opinion of present-day victims of "Socialised Monopoly," they loom up like tea-time pleasures when compared with the galling iniquities inflicted by those public authorities and boards, the members of which seem to have lost all conscience upon such matters as giving value or service for money received. If "J.R.R." has the time, he would be doing a valuable service to Auckland electric light and power consumers by organising a meeting of protest re this matter. It would certainly have my hearty support. I. R. Wild. Sir, —The Auckland Power Board has apparently accumulated a profit of nearly £200,000 in the past three years. This money is not to be used to allow of a reduction in charges, but in the erection of a huge building in Queen Street. The ratepayers have not been consulted as to this expenditure, which is justified, apparently, on the ground that it- constitutes an invesment for use as a reserve. Surely the rating powers of the board are a sufficient reserve, and in any case a sum equal to 13 per cent, of the gross annual revenue is an extravagantly large reserve. The great majority of the board's consumers are still paying fivepence per unit for current, whereas the average charge per unit is under twopence. Does not this suggest that the small consumer is being asked to pay far too much ? It is true that the office expense is the same for the small consumer as for the big one, but aa the board has recently increased office work by reading meters five more times yearly than previously, office expenses cannot weigh heavily. With • over 40,000 customers this change means nearly £IOOO per year extra on postages of accounts, nearly a. quarter of a million more meter readings, the same number of extra accounts to fill in, and to collect, and, with double entry book-keeping, nearly half a million more book entries. This extra work must mean a great deal more expense and as had debts were under the old system under £IOOO per year, there appears to be no valid reason for the change on that ground. Can the board give any valid reason ? Is it to provide a means of spending the new charge of sixpence? Penny-wise.