The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING, Luceo Non Uro. SATURDAY, APRIL 29, 1922. TIMARU’S DANGER.

Southland Times, Issue 19502, 29 April 1922, Page 4

The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING, Luceo Non Uro. SATURDAY, APRIL 29, 1922. TIMARU’S DANGER.

At the present moment Timaru is gravely considering whether or not it will join with the country districts about it in the formation of an electric power board. The question actually goes further than the boundaries of the town, because there is every reason for believing that if the town rejects the proposal to take part in the formation of a power board the rest of South Canterbury will be unable to support the scheme. On the rights and wrongs of the controversy as it affects Timaru, we have nothing to say, but we notice that several of the speakers at recent meetings in their anxiety to prevent the Lake Tekapo project being adopted in preference to current obtained from distant Lake Coleridge were particularly careless in their references to the Southland scheme. In particular Councillor Murphy, of the scope of whose enquiries vve have no information, was too often incorrect in his statements concerning the Southland project to be seriously considered, but he is a member of the Timaru Council and it is to be presumed that his words will have some weight in his own town. We do not know what people Councillor Murphy met when he was in Southland but when he makes statements like In Southland the other day I was shown over a large portion of the district and saw miles of reticulation that was almost completed but which will not be brought into use for many years because the “juice” cannot be given to the people at anything approaching an acceptable price. Councillor Murphy’s knowledge of the project of which he attempts to speak is so limited that he is not aware that the reticulation lines he saw will probably be distributing “juice” before the year is out. His carelessness in this matter prepares us for an equally bad blunder in his reference to the scale of charges. The charges the board proposes to make have been made public and if Councillor Murphy had quoted them and explained them instead of recounting some uninformed gossip he would have been doing the people of his own town and district a better service. The Southland rates are higher than those charged by Lake Coleridge, but the Coleridge to Christchurch rates up to the present, have been rather lower and this year we may see a revision.

The Southland rates, however, are open to public examination, and Councillor Murphy in the course of his enquiries in Southland discovered that “Invercargill has a steam plant and will have nothing to do with the Power Board.” The reason for this supposed diffidence on the part of the corporation (although the two bodies have been and are still conferring about these matters), presumably is given in the following further statement by the Timaru councillor: .

Invercargill is able to generate its current—and retail it far cheaper than was possible in connection with the Monowai scheme.

As we have shown several times, the Invercargill Town Council’s own figures contradict Councillor Murphy utterly. These figures disclose that the cost of generation by the corporation during the first six months of the corporation’s financial year just closed, (the latest figures available) was in the neighbourhood of 2d peri unit, while the Power Board has offered current to the corporation at a price which works out, allowing for the overhead charges on the steam plant if it were left idle, about a half-penny a unit cheaper. If the Power Board should take over the steam plant as a stand-by in connection with the Monowai scheme, which was a part of the original proposals, the cost of Monowai current to Invercargill would be less than half of the present cost of generation. The Invercargill Council is at the present moment discussing these questions with the Southland Power Board, a fact which effectually disposes of Councillor Murphy’s statement that the town will have nothing to do with the board, and we doubt very much if he has any figures concerning the cost of generation in. Invercargill more reliable than those which the corporation has published. The Mayor of Timaru has been caught by some of Mr Hinchey’s figures, and he gave them to the Timaru Borough Council the other night in a manner that was quite unfair, for he neglected to say that these figures have been challenged and cannot be accepted until Mr Rodgers’ canvass has removed the doubts that exist concerning them. These points, we think, deserve our attention because they are calculated to give people outside the province an entirely incorrect id§a of the position of the Monowai scheme. The project has been unfortunate in that it has suffered interruptions due to causes quite outside of the scheme itself, but even the loss of £37,000 in the first year suggested by the chairman does not justify the remarks of the Timaru mayor and councillors, and it ceases to be an. item worthy of use in debate when it is qualified by the fact that it has been openly challenged and has not been shown yet to represent the actual position. As an estimate it is under a cloud. The references to Southland were extremely unfortunate, but the members of the Timaru council who did try to make capital out of what they suggested were the results of their inquiries in this part of the country, were so extremely careless that to people who know the true position they can carry little weight. Before an audience not armed with knowledge, however, they may do incalculable harm and we think it is the duty of the Southland Power Board to protect itself and its scheme as well as to give the people of Timaru official information on the points raised by these councillors.