ELECTRIC SUPPLY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22711, 25 October 1935, Page 10

ELECTRIC SUPPLY

BILL CAUSES ALARM FAR-REACHING POWERS PROPOSED DEBATABLE CLAUSES WITHDRAWN (From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, October 24. The Minister of Public Works, Mr J. Bitchoncr, announced in the House of Representatives to-day that all reference to the control of electrical supply had been deleted from the Public Works Amendment Bill which was introduced this week. The announcement was received with general approval by members, who had expressed the opinion that the Bill as originally drafted constituted a threat to local bodies' and supply authorities. The Minister made it clear that he had removed those sections from the Bill because of anticipated opposition and that the Government intended next session to consolidate the law relating to electrical supply. He denied that anything sinister had been concealed in the Bill and that the Government intended to seize a monopoly of supply. The Leader of . the Opposition, Mr Savage, said that many members had been perturbed about the contents of the original Bill and that most of them had received telegrams from local authorities throughout the country. Mr Savage said he would say no more in view of the Minister’s decision, but he considered that the local bodies would have reason to celebrate the occasion. Mr J. A. Nash, who is president of the Power Boards’ Association and made representations to the Minister when the Bill tv as presented, said that there was no doubt about the need for a great deal of legislation dealing with electrical supply. Power boards and supply authorities had been asking for it for some time and it was unfortunate that the present session did not offer sufficient time to deal with it. Mr Sullivan referred to the 1935 electrical supply regulations, some of which, he said, were most drastic, and he wondered what effect the proposed legislation would have had on these. The local authorities, according to Mr Sullivan, had had a very narrow escape and it was amazing that the Public Works Department and the Minister had even considered imposing such conditions as those contemplated in the Bill. The Prime Minister, Mr Forbes; Don’t you believe in State control? Mr Sullivan: The Prime Minister’s remark is laughable in view of the present administration of the State. He should remember also that the local bodies are representative of the people. Mr Forbes: Sometimes. Mr Sullivan said that in the present case they had as much or more money invested than the Government itself. Some of the local bodies, which had been considering an extension of their supplementary plant in a desire to meet the best interests of consumers, would apparently have been deprived of all opportunity of so doing. The Government could not only have appropriated new plant, but it could have put out of existence any existing plant. Mr Bitchener: That was never our intention. Mr Sullivan: Then why take power to do so? Mr Sullivan referred to the position of Wellington city, which already had one supplementary plant in existence and was preparing another. The suggested Bill would have placed Wellington at the mercy of the Minister and his department. Mr Stallworthy: It is the same with Auckland. Mr Sullivan: It Is just as well that the supply authorities should know the threat that the Government has made. Its proposed Bill made it appear that local authorities could be deprived of their property without compensation. Replying to the debate, the Minister expressed great surprise that his Bill should have been misunderstood. He had brought in the measure expecting that there would be no objections to it, particularly as it was one of the most innocent and reasonable .Bills imaginable. But strange to say, it had raised a storm of opposition mainly in the north, and many insinuations had been laid against the department for its alleged attempts to “ put one over the cities.” The Public Works Department had treated its customers very fairly. “ I should not like to see the destruction of the harmony existing between the department and its customers,” said Mr Bitchener. “We are not like some others. We do not try to make huge profits, and we think it better to supply our customers at a nominal cost than to build up great reserves at their expense. We want to encourage the consumption of electricity and always to help the local supply authorities.” Any honest person, he continued, would give the State credit for assisting the northern standby plants. The department had paid £BO,OOO towards them in one year. All the laws in relation to electrical supply were badly in need of overhaulin" and consolidation, and he hoped that the time for their adjustment was not far distant.