OTAGO HARBOUR BOARD

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21981, 16 June 1933, Page 7

OTAGO HARBOUR BOARD

MONTHLY MEETING The monthly meeting of the Otago Harbour Board was held last night, and was , attended by Messrs H. C. Campbell (chairman), J. W. Munro, M.P., F. Jones, M.P., D. F. H. Sharpe, R. Duncan, T. Bcollay, A. Campbell, H. E. Moller F. E. Tyson, J. Loudon, R. S. Thompson, W. Begg, J. B. Waters, and J. M‘C. Dickson. FINANCIAL. The chairman reported that the bank balances showed a net credit balance of 116,126 lls 2d. CHAIRMAN’S HONORARIUM. A letter was received from the chairman (Mr Campbell) stating that his honorarium for the ensuing term would be subject to the same deductions as the salaries and wages of the board's employees. The letter was received and the chairman thanked for his offer. PURCHASE OF MOTOR CAR.

The Standing Committee recommended that, in view of the fact that it has not been possible to procure a suitable secondhand English car, the tender of Messrs Cossens and Black for a second-hand sixcylinder four-door Dodge sedan car, with a new-car guarantee, be accepted as being the most suitable car for the work. The net price, after allowing for trading in the board’s Tudor sedan, is £245. The recommendation was adopted. INDUSTRIAL AGREEMENTS.

The Standing Committee recommended for adoption the sub-committee’e report with respect to the industrial agreements in regard to the board s labourers. Mole workers, and dredge hands. . . The chairman said he thought this business should be taken in committee. Mr Thompson said he objected. He thought a matter of this kind should be discussed by the open board. Mr Loudon: Has it been formally resolved that the business be taken in committee? ‘ The chairman: I’ll move in that direction. ' V ! • Mr Loudon: I’ll second that motion. Mr Thompson said this was a matter ©f public interest, and its results were far-reaching. That being so, be thought it was only right that the matter should be discussed in open board. Mr Jones said he was also opposed to the business being taken in committee. Personally, he was opposed to _ anything dealing with wages and salaries being taken in committee. Mr Munro said hs would move as an amendment that the matter be not taken in committee. • . .Voices: That’s a direct negative. Vote ■gainst the motion. ... Mr Loudon said he had no desire to have the matter taken in committee beyond the fact that there were a number Of details to be argued or explained. The chairman said that he also had nothina to hide. .. . Mr Thompson retorted that the details had been argued when the matter came before the Standing Committee. , On a vote being taken there voted for the motion Messrs Moller, Loudon, Scollay, Sharpe. Waters, and Begg, and against it Messrs Thompson, Jones, Dickson. Munro, Tyson, and Duncan. Mr A. Campbell did not vote. . The voting being equal the chairman gave his vote in favour of the motion, whieh+ was carried. , , Mr Tyson explained that the only thing ■bout taking the business in committee was that members could speakr two, or three times. The t general public might think they had something to hide. Voices: We have npthmg to hide. The chairman said that certain details had since been discovered which would have to be considered. MOLE WORKS;;

The Standing Committee recommended that the works at the Mole be; resumed on full time as soon as the necessary industrial agreements were finalised. Mr Sharpe asked if it would not be better to hold this matter over until the previous business had been dealt with. After a short discussion the recommendation was adopted. Mr Thompson suggested that the board ■hould approach the Unemployment Board with the object of trying to get a subsidy to help on the work at the Mole. He •aid that the Oamaru Harbour Board had sent a deputation to Wellington to interview the Unemployment Board, and had induced the board to grant it a subsidy. They wanted to push on the work at the Mole as quickly as possible, and if they could get ,a subsidy they would be able to do more work than they would otherwise be able to do. The speaker said he would move that the chairman, the engineer, and the secretary proceed to Wellington at once and get into touch with the Unemployment Board. Mr Begg: It’s a waste of time. Mr Wilkie said that the application to the board had been successful in other cases, and it was well worth trying to obtain the subsidy. , A question was,asked regarding whether it would be necessary to send a deputation from the board. ; •' A member: You wont get anything by writing. Mr Begg: And you won’t get it by trying. You are doing the work out of loan money and you have the money. Mr Loudon said he realised that what they proposed to •do was against the law.

Mr Sharpe: Oamaru got it. The, chairman: If Oamaru got it we will get it. The chairman said the question of whether it would be necessary for the deputation to go to Wellington would be looked into. The motion was then carried. It was explained that the movement was not to utilise unemployed labour. STANDING COMMITTEE UPHELD. In accordance with notice previously lodged, the chairman moved: (a) “That the resolution of the board of January 26, 1923, 82252 (2) by which the board reverted to the Standing Committee system, be rescinded.” (b) “That the following committees be set up in lieu thereof —Works Committee, Finance Committee, and Reserves and General Committee.” _ In submitting his motion, Mr Campbell ■aid that under the present system the work of the board was to a csrtain extent duplicated. ■ Mr Munro seconded the motion, and said he could never understand why a meeting of the Standing Committee was Held, and then the business done all over again at an open meeting of the board. Mr Tyson supported the motion and said that if the Dock Committee were now functioning, he did not think that the dock workshop would have got into the disgraceful condition it was in when he Izist* saw it. Mr Sharpe opposed the motion, and said he thought it wrong that the board’s responsibilities should be thrown on subcommittees. Moreover, a meeting of the Standing Committee allowed fuller discussion. Mr A. Campbell said he wanted the fullest information he could get regarding the board’s activities, and he considered he could obtain this better under the present system than under the system suggested by the chairman. After a genera) discussion by the board, the motion was lost by 8 votes to 5. WANTON DESTRUCTION. The chairman read a communication from the engineer, who drew attention to the wanton damage done to the water tanks at the Spit. He expressed regret that these tanks, which had been erected primarily for the benefit of visitors to the Spit, should have been damaged in such a manner, and suggested that on this occasion they should be repaired. If such a thing should happen again, however, the board would not be responsible for the repairs. , , Mr A. Campbell suggested that the local Amenities Society should take the matter in hand. It was decided that the tanks be. repaired, and that the Amenities Society be asked to attempt to trace the offenders and report to the board. DRAINAGE OF 'RECLAMATION.

In reply to a letter from the board suggesting that an open drain in stone be substituted for the wooden drain through the reclamation area, the town clerk, Port Chalmers, wrote stating that his council agreed to the proposal, and would grant stone from the Port Chalmers quarry free of charge for the construction work, the only cost to the council being the cartage of the stone from the quarry to the site of the work, ( The engineer (Mr Wilkie) said that the cost would be in the neighbourhood of £I4OO/ but it was proposed first of all to construct an experimental 100 feet. The letter was received, and it was decided to proceed with the work, subject to a satisfactory agreement being arrived at with the borough engineer. 7'

A QUESTION OP CHARGES. The Finance Committee submitted the following report:—“The committee has given consideration to the report of the board’s engineer regarding the possibility of removing one of the cranes from Victoria wharf to the Port Chalmers wharves. The committee recommends that the matter of the provision of cranes on the Port Chalmers wharves should stand over, as the board’s finances do not in the meantime permit of the expenditure which would be involved. The committee has considered the report of the board’s engineer relative to the cost of, putting the workshop and forge building in a lettable condition and recommends (1) that the dock workshop buildings be put in order; (2) that this work be carried out by contract; (3) that a report be obtained from the board’s engineer relative to the reconditioning or otherwise of the forge and forge buildings. The committee has deferred consideration of the question of the Freezing Works at Port Chalmers for one month pending the receipt of further information.” Mr Begg referred to the fact that a quantity of apples from Central Otago had, at the end of the season just past, been shipped from Bluff. This was a direct loss to the board, and so far as the fruitgrowers of Otago were concerned they did nob appear to be very loyal to their home port. The primary producers had now only to send their wool, butter, meat, and cheese to Bluff and the board might as well shut up shop. He had noticed that the Bluff Harbour Board was out to cater for the producers, and had offered a further reduction in rates. The exporters appeared to lack the broader aspect of the board’s activities, for if the board was unable to balance its budget, there was only one thing to do—levy a rate, as was done In other districts. The producers should be loyal to their own port. What had Bluff done for them? Mr Thompson: I’ll tell you in a few minutes. Mr Begg went on to say that so far as export of fruit was concerned, that was finished for this year, and the board had now 12 months to consider the matter. He suggested that it might do so before the next fruit season opened, Mr Thompson said he had listened with amazement to Mr Begg’s assertion that the primary producers were lacking in loyalty. The total amount of fruit exported from Central Otago was 160,000 cases, of which only 28,000 cases were shipped from Bluff. This was not due to the exporters, but to the shipping companys who demanded that the fruit should be sent to Bluff. “You talk of loyalty," exclaimed Mr Thompson. “When did you ever do anything to encourage the producers? There is not a single item put over the wharves that you do not charge exorbitantly for! ” Mr Thompson went on to point out that where the Otago Board charged lid per case, wharfage, the Bluff Board charged only half of this amount (sd). In the case of frozen meat, Otago charged 3s per ton, whereas Lyttelton charged sd-, with the result that thousands of fat sheep were sent to Canterbury to be killed. This meant that freezing works employees and waterside workers lost; employment, and the board revenue. Otago charged 2s per ton on butter and cheese, while Lyttelton charged sd. The primary producers were doing their part and more, and the board was doing nothing to encourage them, the result being that trade was going Away from the port. He considered that the board’s charges, so far as the primary producers yere concerned, were nothing short of daylight robbery. Mr A; Campbell said that the discussion had got away from the freezing works at Port Chalmers. With, regard to these works, he thought that the board should at once take steps to get the Dairy GontroL Board to co-operate with it, Moreover, the board would have to find ways and means of putting cranes on the wharves at Port Chalmers. He did not suggest that the cranes should be removed from Dunedin, but the board at present had a fairly substantial credit balance, and he thought something should be earmarked for cranes at Port Chalmers, also, it should take steps to have the freezer Mr J. B. Waters said he felt inclined to deprecate the somewhat emotional remarks of members representative of sectional interests. It would certainly be illuminating if the secretary could submit to the board a comparison between the amount of dues ipaid by primary producers and that paid by other exporters, as there appeared to be .an impression in some quarters that most of the board’s revenue seemed to come from the country producers. These, however, did not. cut such a large figure as might be imagined. Ha considered/ that further inquiries should be made in connection with the freezing works, and the board informed as to the best scheme for reinstating them—either putting them into useful condition or leasing them to someone who would make good use of them. Mr Loudon said he could not altogether agree with Mr Thompson. If Mr Thompson would tell the board where to get more revenue it would be more important than railing at its charges. The true position with regard to the shipping of fruit from Bluff was that the charge for railage to Bluff from Miller’s Flat was 8 l-3d per case, whereas to Port Chalmers it was 6d, and. to meet this difference, _ Bluff made a reduction of Is per ton in its charges. In any case, he failed to see what they could do. If Bluff, a port with a small debt, were prepared to make concessions, he failed to see how they could prevent it, nor could they force exporters to send their produce through any particular port. If Mr Thompson would promulgate some scheme whereby the board could get revenue to meet its charges and carry the port on, and at the same time five concessions, he would like to hear it. .ike Mr Begg, he thought that the board during the coming year should consider whether it could do anything tO T prevent Otago fruit going through Bluff. Naturally every man in the province would like to see everything going through its own port, but he was convinced of the futility of attempting to prevent the fruitgrowers from sending their fruit through Bluff if they wished to. 1 Mr Moller asked if there was not gome sort of a combine in the apple business —was there not a federation Was not Otago in the federation? He understood that Otago did not join the federation. If Otago did not join the federation, who were they going to deal with? Mr Sharpe said he was somewhat amused at such a small thing in the report causing so much discussion. The board was asked to defer consideration for a month, and when the time came round they would have all the discussion over again. The chairman said he rather resented some* of Mr Thompson’s remarks, as they caused him to think that Mr Thompson did not realise that he was a member of* the board. The matter of the freezing works at Port Chalmers would be gone into. Regarding" the reduction of dues at the Bluff, that matter would not be lost eight of. It would be discussed before the next fruit season. The Bluff Harbour Board had been approached by Mr F. G. Duncan, on behalf of the Central Otago fruitgrowers, for a reduction of dues, and that board had agreed to reduce the dues from 2g 6d to Is 6d per ton. Some 66.000 cases of fruit had been sent through the Bluff, and this meant a saving of £247 10s to the shippers. The chairman said that they had already written to engineering firms for quotations for cranes lifting from 25cwt to 30cwt. Unfortunately, as regarded the credit balance, they would want a lot more.to enable them to pay their way The money was more than earmarked. The report was adopted. REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE. The chairman said they would notice that f° r the period 1932-33 they had an increase of revenue of £486, as compared with the similar period for the previous year. That was very satisfactory. Their imports from overseas exceeded those of the previous year, and also their exports. The exports increased from 36,570 tons to 47,000 odd tons, and this was the largest amount of exports for the past four ■ years. Mr Scollay: It looks like as if our country people are very loyal to the port. Mr Thompson: Very much so. Mr Waters said he was very pleased to see an increase in their exports. He would move the adoption of the report, and he felt sure that members would all support anything that could be done to encourage their export trade. It was very necessary that this export trade should come to the proper port, and he was satisfied that everything that should be done in that direction would be done. Speaking' on another resolution, said Mr Waters, he had mentioned the matter of the revenue received from exports. The secretary had taken out the amount of revenue received from exports for the period ended September 30, 1932—derived, that was, from purely agricultural and pastoral products. The total amount was £11.585 14s, That was the contribution their country friends made in the shape of dues on their Their total revenue from exports was £20,635, so that tht country people contributed 56 per

cent, of the total. The amount derived from rents for the same period was £25,000, so that their tenants paid a very much larger amount than the country people. The ships visiting the port made, perhaps, the largest contribution of allpilotage, port, and berthing charges. This total came to £38,000. Their imports brought in £38,000 from all sources. The total revenue of the board for the period he had named, including the dock department, was £136,538. Out of that amount, their country friends paid £11,585. They should not lose sight of the various sources from which they secured their revenue, and they should act as justly as possible to everyone. They were not there to encourage sectional interests. Mr Dickson asked, in reference to the revenue received from ships, what they came to their port for.— (Laughter.) The chairman: Do you wish for an answer ?

Mr Scollay: The question answers itself.

Mr Thompson said that Mr Waters s remarks did not give the true position. The country people used the imports brought to the port, and in this connection paid directly and indirectly towards the revenue of the board. Mr Loudon said he thought they would yet convince Mr Thompson of the. value of a rating area. “ Don’t you think 00, Mr Thompson? ” —(Laughter.) Mr Sharpe said they should not forget that there had not been an increase of exports only in Otago.- There had been an increase in practically every port in New Zealand.

Mr Scollay said he thought they should express appreciation of the amount of revenue they received from the country.— (“Hear, hear.”) They should not allow the Bluff to take their trade without a fight. If Bluff could afford to export fruit for nothing for a year, they could also afford to do it for nothing for a year. They should tell their country friends that they wanted -their trade. Mr Thompson: Reduced dues arc all we want. The report was adopted.

MUSSEL BAY RECLAMATION. Mr Thompson, .in accordance with notice previously ’ given, moved —“ That the engineer be instructed to provide for the board’s information (1) a detailed analysis of expenditure incurred in connection with the reclamation of Mussel Bay; (2) a detailed estimate of the coat to complete the above work.” Mr Thompson said that as the reclamation work at Mussel Bay had now been in progress for some considerable time, he considered that the meinbers were entitled to a report as to the expenditure incurred since its commencement. His motion' was really a step towards a decrease in dues, which could only come about through a decrease in the output in revenue. He was of opinion that a good deal of the expenditure on Mussel Bay should not have been incurred, and if such expenditure could be prevented or reduced it would be one means of assisting in thfr reduction of dues. Mr Sharpe seconded the motion, and expressed the opinion that a report such as suggested by Mr Thompson would bring forward valuable information. Mr Dickson pointed out that the board was reclaiming Mussel Bay because that was the cheapest method of getting rid of the spoil from the channel-widening operations in Lower Harbour. The cost of the work was immaterial—the point was that the board was saving money because the spoil had not to be taken out to sea. If the engineer and the. harbourmaster wfere satisfied that sufficient work had been done on the channel, then he would suggest stopping the Mussel Bay reclamation at once.

Mr Waters, in supporting the motion, said that any move towards the reduction of dues was worthy of endorsement. It would not take a large surplus to enable the board to make a substantial reduction in export and import dues, and unless the expenditure were reduced there was no hope of any reduction in dues. Mr A. Campbell suggested that Mr Thompson was under the impression that the Mussel Bay reclamation was the only work on which the board could save money, He could name others. He suspected that the mover’s real idea was to tie up the Vulcan, which was a mistaken policy. In any case, he disagreed with the system of dredging in the Lower Harbour; if the board had kept the channel to' its original width there would now have been no trouble.

Mr Tyson did not see that the motion would get them anywhere. For it to do any good they would have to have a comparative statement of costs between. dumping the spoil at Mussel Bay and outside the Heads or anywhere else. Mr Loudon pointed out that Mussel Bay had been recommended by the engineer as an economical place to dump the spoil from the Lower Harbour, and it had been found on investigation that Mussel Bay waa quite a cheap place to dump. Mr Munro said he thought it was quite right that Mr Thompson should get his figures. He was in favour, however, of creating an area at Mussel Bay, even if it cost a little more money than taking the spoil out to the Heads. Mr Thompson had been a member of the board when the matter had been considered, and he did not like the inference that the board had. been wasting its funds and robbing the country producer. He thought it was jvrong that such a statement should go out to the public, and he intended to raise hie voice against it.

Mr Tyson: Were we not committed to this work some years ago? The chairman: Yes, we were. Mr Duncan said the matter had been very carefully discussed, and it was looked on as an economical work for dealing with the dredging in the lower harbour. Of course, Port Chalmers might have entered into the picture to a certain extent, and quite rightly too. It was better to ’ put the spoil into the Mussel Bay than run the risk of its drifting back into the harbour. He had thought the whole matter had been finished with.

Mr Begg said he had understood that Mr Thompson was bringing up the question of maintenance dredging as against carrying on further improvements. Mr Thompson had now, in his wisdom, seen fit to bring forward the matter in its present form. It was very much to be regretted that the Mussel Bay discussion had been brought in at all. Mr Scollay: Perhaps he will withdraw it.— (Laughter.) / Mr Thompson, replying, denied that he had any intention of closing down the Vulcan. He had always held that the board had made a mistake in moving the Vulcan from the Victoria channel when it did. He had also desired to get a comparison of the cost of taking the spoil to sea and putting it into Mussel Bay. It cost £2O more per load to take spoil froin the Upper Harbour to sea than taking it to sea from the Lower Harbour. He held that the whole of the board’s reclamation areas should have been reserved for dredgings from the Upper Harbour and the spoil from the Lower Harbour should have been, taken to sea. If 100 tons of spoil were taken from the Lower Harbour and put into Mussel Bay, it meant £2OOO more to dispose of an equivalent amount of dredging from the Upper Harbour. He was satisfied that that statement could be substantiated by their engineer. The speaker criticised the action of the board in widening the bend at Deborah Bay, because the board could ill afford the expenditure, and no direct request for the widening had come from their harbour master in the interests of shipping. A voice: Question. Mr Thompson said that the largest ship which had ever entered their port had safely negotiated the bend at half-tide. They had spent money out of revenue for the widening, and this meant an increased maintenance cost. If expenditure was to be incurred like this they could never hope to reduce their dues. The chairman, in answer to a question, said that there was any amount of water in the lower channel. Mr Tyson said he had never heard of any vessel not coming to their port owing to lack of water. Mr Sharpe said that it was only some six months ago since the Akaroa had come to their port. Mr Thompson’s motion -was then put and carried. ENGINEER’S REPORT. The engineer (Mr J. M‘G. Wilkie) reported that during May the dredge Otakou lifted 16 loads, or 23,680 yards, of spoil, the whole of which was deposited at the dredge Vulcan. During the month the dredge steamed 212.5 miles and consumed 68.18 tons of fuel oil. On the completion of the dredging of some shallow patches in Victoria channel between piles 16-20, early in the month, moorings were lifted and relaid in the Deborah Bay bend to continue the widening on the black side between beacons 1112. On May 8 moorings were again lifted and relaid in the Harrington Bend above beacon No. 5, and the shoal patch recently found in the main channel dredged to 33ft low water. Moorings were again removed to Deborah Bay, and a second set laid at the Kitchener street

wharf to provide an alternative claim in the event of rough weather. During the month the . dredge Vulcan pumped 23,680 cubic yards of material received from the dredge Otakou into the Mussel Bay reclamation area. During the month two vessels were docked and three pumpings were carried out. The electric crane was in operation for four hours. The reclamation of Mussel Bay is steadily progressing, the spoil being confined to the inner area with the object of completing that portion to finished level first, A commencement was made to effect the necessary repairs to Birch street wharf in accordance with the requirements of the district railways engineer. A considerable amount of old decking was removed and new timber laid and spiked down. The bottom row of galvanised iron sheets on the road side of the storage shed, which was badly corroded, was removed and new iron erected. Relief workers were employed at the Leith estuary and the south endowment areas erecting walls for reclamation purposes. A number of men from the Port Chalmers depot were employed repairing the Spit and Aramoana roads, the material used being obtained from the board’s No. 3 quarry. A shelter and tool shed was erected at the Leith estuary relief works. A considerable amount of filling was deposited and spread at the cement works yard, which is being levelled off as suitable material is obtained. The last of the old dilapidated houses on the boards property at the foot of Hanover street, adjacent to Anzac avenue, were recently demolished. Current velocities and directions were taken at the Harrington Point bend in connection with the investigation of the shallowing of the main navigation channel on the red side from beacons Nos. 3 to 5. ... The report was adopted. SHIPPING RETURNS.

The harbour master (Captain Mac Lean) reported as follows, under date June SiArrivals. —Dunedin: Coastal, 25 vessels, 14,829 tons; intercolonial. 3 vessels, 4793 tons; overseas, 3 vessels, 13,410 tons. Totals—3l vessels, 33,032 tons. Arrivals. —Port Chalmers: Coastal, 4 vessels, 1267 tons; intercolonial, 1 vessel, 166 tbns; overseas, 10 vessels, 55,917 tons. Totals —15 vessels, 57,350 tons. Departures.—Dunedin: Coastal, 28 vessels, 16,009 tone; intercolonial, 3 vessels, 4023 tons; overseas, 4 vessels, 19,480 tons; Totals—3s vessels, 39,512 tons. Departures. —Port Chalmers: Coastal, 2 vessels, 513 tons; intercolonial, 2 vessels, 3315 tons; overseas, 10 vessels, 56,808 tons; Totals—l 4 vessels, 60,636 tons. CHANNEL SOUNDINGS.

Captain M’Lean reported as follows on the channel soundings:— North Channel.—The least water on the line of leads at low water is 36 feet. South Channel—The least water at low water is 25 feet. From the mole end to Port Chalmers the least depth is 30 feet low water, with the least width in Deborah Bay 300 feet. The Victoria channel is maintaining: a low-water depth of 20 feet 6 inches. No soundings since last month having been taken owing to other work being carried out.