WATER BOARD BILL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20333, 14 August 1929, Page 10

WATER BOARD BILL.

The Auckland Water Board Bill will not proceed this session. The Prime Minister has been quite definite in his statement to that effect, and on the reasons he has given it is impossible to dispute the soundness of his decision." Sir Joseph Ward disclaims any intention of taking sides or of judging between the parties to this question. His refusal to have the bill presented docs not involve doing either. The attitude he takes is simple and reasonable. He contends that ho has not been given enough evidence to justify departure from the ordinary procedure with local bills to inaugurate a scheme of the size described to him while Auckland City is not a consenting party. There is another very good reason besides this one why he, as leader of the House, would find it difficult to do as the earlier deputation asked. If the City Council seriously opposed the passing of the measure, its views would certainly find support in Parliament. It is difficult enough to have a local bill passed even when all the ordinary rules are followed if it is in any way contentious. When it appears so late in the session as to require a suspension of the Standing Orders to permit its introduction, those difficulties are immediately increased. The House is inclined to demand assurance that the point at issue is really urgent, and that opinion in its favour is unanimous before taking the necessary action. The sponsors of this measure would find it difficult to establish either condition to the satisfaction of the members, the greater number of whom are not greatly concerned with the question whether the water supply of Greater Auckland is or is not adequate for future needs. So far these are general considerations. One point of particular application can be commended to those who are promoting the bill. The Prime Minister said the Government would require to be satisfied the Auckland City Corporation was working in unison with the other bodies before entertaining the proposal. They will fin v d it difficult to explain to any public man outside the Auckland area how a scheme to cover Greater Auckland can be seriously advanced without Auckland City co-operating. This must affect the prospects of their bill this year or any other year.