ARTESIAN WATER

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21411, 8 February 1933, Page 8

ARTESIAN WATER

A principle of national importance is involved in a bill promoted by the Onehunga and the One Tree Hill Borough Councils, ostensibly to ensure the "conservation and protection" of the underground sources from which the two boroughs draw their water supplies. They are asking for statutory sanction for the making of by-laws under which they would be able to prevent boring for water, oils, minerals or other substances in privatelyowned lands. These proposals have naturally aroused*strong opposition, for they constitute a direct invasion of property rights and especially prejudice prospective industrial developments in the Onehunga borough. A simple affirmation of zeal for the conservation of municipal water undertakings is not sufficient to sanction the creation of such a dangerous precedent. Parliament should pursue its investigations beyond the superficial aspects of the bill. Inquiry may usefully be made regarding, the character and the extent of trading operations undertaken particularly by the Onehunga Council. More than a year ago, it entered into a contract for 21 years to supply water to Mount Roskill, incidentally at two-thirds of the price paid for a supply from the city. When the conclusion of negotiations was announced, concern was expressed by the One Tree Hill Council that this large addition to the consumptive demand might adversely affect its interests, and a placatory reply was

made to the effect that the underground sources were virtually inexhaustible. In view of the present collaboration of the two councils strongly suggests that the real purpose of the bill is to allay the anxiety of the One Tree Hill Council. Whatever its motives, unless absolute ' evidence can be produced to justify temporary restrictions against operations actually endangering the water supply, there would be abundant justification for suspending the bill until Parliament has time to consider the principle involved in Us national aspects. It is certainly improper that minor local authorities should be Eillowed to lay down a precedent for the complete subordination of the rights of property-owners to municipal water undertakings, especially when the latter implicitly claim an unlimited right to sell water to contiguous local authorities.