FLOOD PROTECTION

New Zealand Times, Volume LIV, Issue 12652, 12 January 1927, Page 12

FLOOD PROTECTION

OPERATION IN MANAWATU GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE ONTRIBUTION RECOMMENDED A substantial expenditure of Government money is recommended by the report oi the commission which inquired into, the . operations of the ManawatuGroua River Board, which has been carrying out extensive flood protective works throughout the Manawatu district.; The Government is recommended to grant a subsidy of .£201,041, while a lengthy report details the interests which the neighbouring drainage boards and local bodies have in the effect of the tscheme. The coihmission was directed to inquire generally into the necessity or expediency of the Government granting a subsidy towards the cost of the operations of the Manawatu-Oroua River Board, the River Board being of opinion that tho Government was deriving or would derive a benefit from such operations, and particularly into the following matters: — 1. The extent to which the operations would provide a better location for roads or highways or make roads and highways safe for through traffic at all times of the year, or otherwise benefit roads. 2. The extent to which the operations would benefit the Government railways by reason of improved waterways or otherwise^. 3. The extent to which the operations would generally lessen the demands on the Government from settlers suffering loss or damage to their properties by reason ot flooding of rivers in the Alanawatu-Oroua River District. 4. VVhat (in the event of it being desirable that a Government subsidy be granted) should be the amount, period and rate of such subsidy, and what conditions (if anyi should precede or be attached to payment of such subsidy or any part thereof. 3. Whether further legislation would be necessary to enablo effect to be given to the findings of the commission, and if so. the nature of such legislation. SUBSIDY RECOMMENDED The , commissioners dealt extensively with every phase of the association with the scheme,, and said that a Government subsidy should be measux’able by the benefit derived by the State. It was tfiought by the commissioners that, having regard to the benefits, the Government should grant a subsidy of .£201,4)41. They thereforev recommended that it is expedient that the Government should grant a subsidy of .£201,041 towards the cost of the operations carried out or proposed to be carried out under, the powers conferred by the ManawatuUro'ua River District Acts of 1923 and 1C25. This subsidy, the commissioners recomihend, should be spread over the construction period of five years, and be payable as required for the proposed operations, pro rata with the other contributions referred to. “lour commissioners further consider” tthe report went on) “that, in the event of the Government subsidising the cost of the works to this extent, it should not be called upon at any future time to pay any maintenance charges or any compensation for flood-damage, further they recommend that, in the event of VTTe Government subsidising the cost of the works to the above extent, a River Trust should be constituted for the Manawatu-Oroua River District, with a subdivision representation of commissioners, corresponding to that of the present subdivision members, and two Government commissioners (one of whom should be chairman of the trust) appointed similarly and with similar powers to those given to the Waiiuakariri Government commissioners under the Waimakarivi River improvement Act, '1922.” LOCAL bodies After outlining the relation of the various local bodies the commissioners recommended that the following amounts should be respectively apportioned to the borough councils cited os follow: Palmerston North Borough Council, £10,000; Foxton Borough Council, £ 1C0U; Shannon Borough Council, £900; Levin Borough Council, £6OO. The apportionments for county councils are: —Kairanga County Council, *£2014; Horowhenua County Council, .£5844; Manawatu County Council, £9GI2. OTHER RIVER WORKS On the percentage of rates collected the contributions from the various drainage boards are as follow:—Sluggish river, £2503; Moutoa, .£2711; Make- , rua, £18,410; Buckley (as existing), .£283; Manawatu, .£."873 ; total, £29,784. . 'The qiutsti- ’* of the Manawatu-Oroua ! River Bou;£S» interest in work exe-; cuted by tin- Makerua Drainage Board! was also involved, and in this connection the commission recommended that the Manawatu-Oroua River Board should grant to the Tands within the district of the MaTcorua Drainage Board a consideration commensurate with the sum of £71,973. That consideration the commissioners recommend should be granted' as follows: Makerua Drainage Board's apportionment of cost of proposed works (vide report on commission, dated May 28th, 19-6), £18,416. Balance (to be paid by the River Board to the Makerua Drainage Board in cash or a cash equivalent or to be allowed by the River Board in the River Board rating from the lands in the Makerua Drainage Board’s area), £33,459; total, £71,975.