HARBOUR PROBLEM.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20537, 11 April 1930, Page 14

HARBOUR PROBLEM.

DIFFICULTIES AT THAMES.

GOVERNMENT HELP WANTED. "THE BOARD'S ONLY HOPE." [BY TELEGRAM.-—OWV CORRESPONDENT. ] THAMES. Thursday. The harbour scheme was fully discussed at a meeting of the Thames Harbour Board last evening. Members agreed that the scheme had reached a position of stalemate and the only hope lay in Government assistance to complete the scheme. Finally it was decided to approach the Minister of Murine again for assistance after seeking the cooperation of the Thames Borough Council, the Chamber of Commerce, and the members of the Harbour Improvement Delegation who had originally advocated tho present scheme. Mr. R, Coulter, Mayor of To Aroha, said ho wanted to know whether tho Thames people wished the board to go any further with the work failing Government assistance. Should they not go to tho Borough Council and tho Chamber of Commerce and give them a chance of voicing their opinion. They were paying the rato and wero entitled to know what was boing done. " Deplorable State Disclosed."

The chairman, Mr. 11. Lowe, referred to tho recent visit of tho l'ort Waikato and I lie experience that vessel had had. When trying to get out after unloading she had stuck in the mud for two days. "This discloses a deplorable state in our harbour," he said. "It is certainly necessary that something should bo done." However, tho chairman continued, he could not seo tho up-country members of the board, for instance, advising their ratepayers to raise money by way of loan for the completion of tho work. With regard to Government assistance, tin®' officials had sent an adverse report. There wero only two alternatives. Ono was to let tho whole thing go, and all tho money spenj, £66,000, bo wasted, or endeavour to raise more money to finish tho scheme.

Mr. Edwards (Paeroa) said £66.000 had already been spent and if the board did nothing that money would be wasted. Personally ho had doubts as to tho present scheme ever acting successfully, but ho understood there were many people in Thames who thought it would, and were very keen to sec it carried out. There was, no question that something must bo done. Duty of tho Board. Mr. Donovan (Thames Borough) said tho completion of the scheme was the duty of the board. When a deputation waited on tho council for tho request to rr.iso the extra £6OOO it had been stated this would be sufficient to complete the scheme. "We have failed and it is our duty to find a way cut," said Mr. Dnno-

Mr. Kennedy (Piako County) said the trouble was not tho responsibility of the board, which had undertaken to carry out tho scheme if Thames found tho money. "All we havo got is a new wharf," he added. Mr. C. W. Harris (Hauraki PJains) said the position was nothing short, of a catastrophe. The ratepayers had provided £66.000 and got nothing for it. The board had acted all along on tho advice of its engineer, and bait done its best. 'lhe board should co-operate with the ratepayers and urgt} tho Government to give assistance.

Mr. Coulter said the lip country members had opposed Ihe scheme but felt they could not he a stumbling block in the way of tho Thames people, -who were spending their own nionnv Mr. Lowe said the borough had already accepted all the liability it could be asked to accept. The up-country representatives had helped to spend the money but had no liability. If the board was no good to tho up-country why were the members represented on it '! " Harbour Does Not Interest Us."

Air. Coultpr: We are. quite willing to get out. We fought, tooth nnrl n;iil to get To Arolifi excluded from the district. Tho hnrliour does not interest us iind right from the start wo have not spent Ihe money. We allowed all matters to he dealt with I>y Iho local committee. The chairman said the whole, of the waterways in tho harhour district, should lie under the board, which should collect wharfage from Paeroa, To Aioha and the whole of (ho district, in the board's area. He considered tlu; harbour district was too small. Eucli member of the board was equally responsible for the expenditure of the money. There was something wrong when out of £66,000 only £'16,000 had been spent in work done, and the other £20,000 spent on machinery,

Finally it was decided that tho board should make, further representations to the Minister of Marine for further assistance toward tho completion of the scheme and that tho board should invite the cooperation of tho Thames Borough Council, the Thames Chamber of Commerce nnd the individual co-operation of every member of tho Thames Harbour Improvement Scheme Delegation,