THE MAUI POMARE.

Otago Witness, Issue 3890, 2 October 1928, Page 69

THE MAUI POMARE.

PAYMENT OF HARBOUR DUES. DISCUSSION BY HARBOUR BOARD. Whether the Government should pay the usual harbour dues incurred during the visit of the Maui Pomare to Dunedin was a question which was debated at some length at the meeting of the Otago Harbour Board on Friday evening. Messrs H. L. Tapley and Co., Ltd., the agents for the vessel, in acknowledging receipt of an account for £43 16s for berthage and other charges, stated that the board was not legally entitled to recover this amount from the Government. The visits of the vessel were of vital importance to Otago and Southland. The service was purely a Government one, and private shipping companies would not cater for the Samoan trade. It was apparent that for some years the service must be run at a financial loss. The writers trusted that the matter would be allowed to rest.

Mr C. H. Hayward asked what the position was in other ports. The chairman stated that other boards had decided to claim the dues, and the Otago Board had endorsed their action. Personally, he would be quite prepared to leave the matter as it stood. He did not think that the board had the right to claim the dues.. Other boards, however, maintained that they should No private company would take up the service because it could not make it pay. Mr J. Loudon said that he thought it desirable that the matter should be thoroughly investigated. The secretaryshould be asked to prepare a minute on the subject. He moved that the matter be referred to the Standing Committee for a report. — Mr D Larnach seconded the motion.

“We should make a stand and support the other boards,” stated Mr T. Anderson. The Maui Pomare was not the right steamer foi the work, and she would never pay. The board was entitled to the money, and as a matter of fact it could do with all the dues that it could collect.

Mr D, F. H. Sharpe said that the question was -not a new -one. The Otago Board had already decided to support the other boards. Surely, it was not to be allowed to go out that the board had gone back on its decision. Government vessels paid dues in Australia.

Mr A Cable: If we carried a motion previously, what is the use of beating the air?

The board did not have the right to charge, said Mr J. W. Munro. The matter had been first brought up by the Wellington Board, which felt that it was not getting its just deserts with Government steamers generally There was. however, another viewpoint. There had been great

difficulty in getting the ship to call at Dunedin. The service must show a loss, and if the board did not assist the dues would go on to the price of the fruit, and the consumer would have to pay. “We are only wasting our time,” he concluded. . Captain Coll M’Donald stated that the vessel belonged to the people of New Zealand, and if Auckland and Wellington collected dues Otago should also collect them. Mr W. Gow stated that he would feel inclined to make an exception in this case were it not for the danger of creating a precedent. Mr Anderson was accused of turning a somersault when he moved as an amendment—” That the matter be held over until it had been considered by the harbour boards’ conference.” The amendment did not attract a seconder, and Air Loudon’s motion was carried on the voices.