DRAINAGE PLAN

New Zealand Herald, Volume 82, Issue 25343, 26 October 1945, Page 8

DRAINAGE PLAN

FATE OF PETITIONS LONG DISCUSSION ENSUES (S.R.) WELLINGTON, Thursday The method of disposing of Auckland's sewage was debated throughout this afternoon in the House of Representatives. The Local Bills committee reported that it had considered two petitions praying for an investigation into alternative methods of providing drainage for Auckland and for the repeal of the empowering legislation, and that it had no recommendation to make. The petitions were from Mr T. 0. Webster, of Auckland, and 2D others, and Mr C. A. Carter, of Auckland, and ■43,006 others. "Over 43,000 people signed the petition, and I am sorry to see the recommendation of the committee, as the matter is one of tremendous importance," said Air W. J. Broadfoot (Opposition—Waitomo). "When the drainage of Auckland was taken to Orakei, we were told that there would be no problems in the harbour, and the word ot' previous experts does not encourage us to take the word of the experts of today." Mr Broadfoot also made a strong case for the treatment of the city's sewage and refuse to convert it into organic manure. Investigation Wanted

"My opinion is that there is room for further investigation, and I was one of the committee who disagreed with its finding," said Mr S. W. Smith (Opposition —Bay of Islands). It was rather tragic that this unusual petition was not presented 15 months earlier, said Mr H. T. Morton (Opposition—Waitemata). There were certain aspects of the Auckland drainage scheme about which he was not at all happy. There was no provision for including the North Shore boroughs with a present population of 30,000. Something had to be done about Auckland's drainage, but he could see no harm iu delaying the scheme for two or three years and answering favourably the prayer of this very large petition. "There is a tremendous amount of feeling in Auckland about this," said Mr J. N. Massey (Opposition—Franklin). "Aucklanders are beach conscious, but their harbour is not all that it should be. Some say that the public is unduly alarmed, but evidence tendered before the committee showed that many were not satisfied with the Brown-s'-Island scheme." Another Viewpoint

Mr W. T. Anderton (Government — Eden) said that the Manukaii scheme had disadvantages, and one of them was the length of sewer that would be required, to carry the sewage to its outfall. Surely the Auckland Harbour Board and its engineers were not going to be so foolish as to. complain about the present outfall at Orakei and commit the same offence at Brown's Island? Even if a Royal Commission was appointed, and no additional expert evidence was placed before it, the commission would come to the same conclusion as the committee. An amendment that the report be referred back to thf committee for further consideration was moved by Mr R. M. Algie (Opposition—Remuera), who said he was satisfied last year that the expert opinion was the correct one. He felt now that that expert opinion represented the most reliable guide they had, but notwithstanding that there was a considerable amount of lay opinion that was not satisfied. It was their job to see that that opinion was satisfied. Until a commission had been set up, there would he a body of opinion in Auckland that would remain unconvinced. , The amendment was seconded by Mr F. W. Doidge (Opposition—Tauranga). Case Against Delay The Minister of Health, Mr Nordmeyer, said the only effect of carrying the amendment would be to delay still further a most urgent and important ( work. Mr A. S. Sutherland (Opposition— Hauraki) said that he was in Jfccord with the recommendation of the committee, and saw no purpose in supporting the amendment. The sludge was not to be tipped into the harbour, as suggested by Mr Doidge, but was to bo taken out in barges to the Hauraki Gulf and deposited at sea. "I hesitate to enter into a local argument, but the questions of health and housing must be considered," said the Prime Minister, Mr Fraser. "We cannot lightly set aside schemes which have been promoted bv the Auckland City Council, the Auckland Harbour Board, the Health Department, and the Local Bills Committee, without strong reasons, and I submit that these reasons are not there." After further discussion, the debate was interrupted by the adjournment of the House at 5.30, and without the amendment having heen put. COMPENSATION ISSUE LEGISLATION SOUGHT SUPPORT BY COMMITTEE (S.R.) WELLINGTON. Thursday A recommendation that the petition of Mr D. M. Robinson, of Glendowie, and 102 others praying that legislation should be provided for the payment, of condensation to property owners for damage or loss sustained through the operation of the Auckland Metropolitan Drainage Act should be referred to the Government for most favourable consideration was conveyed to the House of Representatives today by the chairman of the Local Bills Committee, Mr D. W. Coleman (Opposition—Gisborne). Mr R. M. Algie (Opposition—Remuera) thanked the committee for the liberal view it had taken. He said that the petitioners were mainly residents of the eastern end of his electorate residing near the coast. Provision'for compensation had been made in the Act, but there were some aspects that gave rise to fears that their lands could be injuriously affected in a way not covered. The petitioners asked ror an amendment to the law to meet the case. The Prime Minister, Mr Eraser, asked for an explanation. He claimed that it was the responsibility of the Auckland Drainage Board, and he wanted to know what was the responsibility of the Government. Mr Coleman explained that the petitioners were afraid that otle-clause of the Act might nullify another. Representatives of the drainage board had signified their willingness before the committee to have a clause inserted which would make it clear and protectthe petitioners. The Government would not be involved in any way and he felt wiire that the drainage board would have the matter rectified to the satisfaction of all. Mr T. C. Webb (Opposition—Kaipara) said the result would be that any person who suffered damage from the works of the board would now be entitled to compensation, but would be unable to get an injunction through the Courts to stop the board from carrying out its work. ROTOIUJA EX-SERVICEMEN (O.(l) HOTOIiUA, Thursday A membership of 814, of whom 428 were members of the second world war, was announced at the quarterly meeting of the Rotorua Returned Services Association tonight. Sub-branches at Whakapara, Mamaku and Reparoa had affiliated with the Rotorua branch, The new draft constitution was adopted, and will be forwarded for registration. It was resolved to ask Dominion headquarters to bring before the .notice of Parliament during the present' session the need for an ' announcement on the time arid manner of allocating war gratuities - atid deferred pay. *