LAND DRAINAGE

Southland Times, Issue 19389, 1 November 1924, Page 7

LAND DRAINAGE

THE COUNTY’S POSITION FIXING FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY MOTION TO HOLD UP WORK DEFEATED The Southland County Council had under consideration yesterday morning a letter from its solicitors dealing with the question of the incidence and collection of land drainage accounts, which aroused considerable discussion. Cr Golden contended that the Council was not sufficiently protected by the existing legislation on the subject, and moved that no drainage work be gone on with where the Crown was interested in the drain until legislation was passed in the direction he had indicated. This was rejected by the meeting by a large majority, members contending that the financial loss to the Council was only a small one, and the position did not warrant the holding up of necessary drainage in the County. THE LEITER. The letter from the County’s solicitors was as follows: "We have considered the questions raised in Cr Golden’s resolution, and advise the Council as follows: ( 1) Can the Land Drainage Accounts be charged to the ridings in which the work is done, and, in the event of loss, can the riding be made responsible for same? vVc are of the opinion that the expenditure within a riding on work done under the Southland Land Drainage Act cannot be charged to the account of the riding for the following reasons:— (a) Section 131 of the Counties Act, dealing with expenditure, provides that after payment of the general expenses of administration and certain defined appropriations, the remainder of the gross estimated income shall be apportioned among the general ridings of the County in proportion to the total income estimated to be received from each riding in respect of general rates.” and “the amount so apportioned to any riding shall be expended on works in that riding during the same or any subsequent year.” In our opinion the works referred to in this section are works of a public nature which the Council is authorised to undertake under the Counties Act. The works authorised under the Southland Land Drainage Act are of a private nature, and are not, in our opinion, included in the works on which riding monies are to be expended under section 131. (b) The underlying principle in the charging of public works in a riding to its account is that the road, bridge, or other work constructed is, more or less, of common advantage to all in the riding. Work carried out under the Southland Land Drainage Act are of no more benefit to the other ratepayers in that riding than to the ratepayers in any other riding. There is really less reason for charging any part of the cost of drainage works under the above Act to ratepayers in the riding other than those for whose benefit the work was done, than for charging the whole County, as in the latter case each ratepayer’s contribution would be smaller. We consider that the whole County should bear any losses on drainage works as part of the general expenses of administration. (2) Can the Council recover the amount charged on land where the Advances to Settlers Department has a mortgage, and has the Council prior claim to recovery? Monies owing by an “owner’’ under the Southland Land Drainage Act are charged on the land of the owner and are recoverable as rates. This charge takes priority over all mortgages and encumbrances to private persons. The question is, however, whether the charge does or does not take priority over a mortgage to the State Advances Office Superintendent. The question would arise when, in consequence of non-payment for a judgment for drainage monies, the land came to be sold. In such a case would the land have to be sold subject to the mortgage to the Superintendent, or it could be sold freed from the mortgage and the purchase money applied in payment firstly of the drainage charge, and then in payment of the amount of the mortgage? We are of the opinion that a charge for ihe cost of drainage works takes priority over mortgages to the State Advances Office Superintendent, but in the absence of direct authority, have to admit that we have some doubt on the point. The Crown is not bound by an Act unless a clear intention appears therein that it should be bound. Then, too, debts owing to the Crown take priority over other debts. But under the State Advances Act, a separate person or entity, the “State Advances Office Superintendent” and a separate account, called the “State Advances Account” are created. All mortgages are given to the Superintendent in his corporate capacity. Other provisions in the State Advances Act seem to indicate that the mortgages are of the same nature and have the same priorities as mortgages to private individuals. It appears, therefore, that the mortgages are not Crown mortgages, and, if they are not, the Crown, in so far as advances by the Department is concerned, has placed itself in the position of a private lender. THE DISCUSSION. Cr Golden said that, in view of the letter from their solicitors, he thought that before they went in for any more drainage they should get protection by Act of Parliament. It seemed that these defects were discovered many years ago, but never remedied, and before they went in for a big scheme they should endeavour to secure protection by having legislation- brought down to meet the p<osition. A farmer today might be financial and a bona-fide farmer, and he might sell out to-morrow and the Crown take a mortgage, and very little equity might be left. The question then was: where were they going to get the money? Cr Fraser: It is a charge on the land, no matter who buys it. Cr Golden: In fact, the case now is worse than it was when the farmers were in a better position than they are now Cr Robertson: Question? Cr Golden: I think the farmer’s position eight or nine years ago was better than it is to-day. Cr Fraser: There is no doubt the Act could be simplified to a great extent. That has been under consideration for some years. I don’t think there is any use in taking a gloomy view' of the position. I would certainly be very much against drainage being stopped altogether. The drains already constructed by the County have added thousands of pounds to Southland property. Mr Golden: Nobody doubts that. But why should the Toi Tois people pay for work in other ridings? A member: No one is asking them to pay for it. Cr Robertson said that personally he was not in favour of Cr Golden's line of argument. He thought they could blame themselves. They went into it a little too rashly. There had been a little loss, but he thought they would have to bear it. He did not like the idea of the Act going back to Parliament to be fought out and possibly other clauses put in that they did not want. He was in favour of every riding paying for its own undertakings, as Cr Golden argued, but in some ridings this could not be done. The Chairman (Mr W. Norman) said they had really lost nothing yet so far as it applied to Advances to Settlers. They had always been able to get the money. Dealing with the general aspect, of the question, the Chairman said that so far as losses went, the Winton riding had cut as many drains under the Southland Land Drainage Ac 4 as any other riding in the County, and there was not one penny owing. The men were willing to pay. It was in many cases their only hope to get their land dry. “I say it is not fair to humbug these men as has been done in the past seven or eight months.” continued Mr Norman. “Drain-

age has made Southland. We had no power whatever until the preeent Act came in to prevent a man holding up his neighbours. I admit that this County did not study this scheme when it came into operation as it should have done. There have been losses, and the County will have to stand it. This question of drainage is such a big thing. Some 160 applications have gone through the County. I don’t think we should worry. We won’t have these losses again.” Cr Neiderer: We can consider each individual case. We don’t need to take on any drains where payment is doubtful. Cr Golden: I don’t doubt that drainage has done good in Southland. But how were those losses made? Cr Fraser: In view of Cr Golden’s statement, I will move for a return to be placed before the Council. The County Clerk (Mr A J. Service) said that for the two years 1923-24, £2lOB 5/4 had been received from owners, and £ll5B had been expended on drains, leaving a balance on March 31, 1924, of £2844 6/3. In 1923 it was £3197, and had been reduced to £2844 6/3 in the present year. Cr Golden: A reduction of £350 in over £3OOO. The Chairman: Two of the drains, West Plains and Lowborn Stream, represent practically £l5OO. Mr Service said the accounts for these two works had not yet been sent out, as the work was not yet completed. The County Clerk continued that there had been slight losses. There had been a reduction of apportionment in some cases. Cr Golden: The Drainage Committee was not in existence then, was it? The County Clerk: No. He went on to say that losses had also been incurred through technical errors when the machinery of the Act was not very familiar to them. He was willing to take his share of the blame for that. Cr Neiderer said that the way Mr Golden spoke, it would mean holding up the work altogether. The Chairman: The greatest grievance in Southland at the preeent time is land speculators. They wait on the land, paying their rates, and waiting for their neighbours to improve their land. The only way to make these people give their neighbours the necessary fall is by the Drainage Act. Cr Fraser: The whole thing boiled down then is that apart from the two big drains that have been mentioned, the amount is very trivial? The Chairman: That is so. Cr Fraser: I don’t think there is any need for a return, then. Cr Golden, however, said he was going on with his motion. He would move that no drainage work be gone on with where the Crown was interested in the drain until legislation was passed to meet the position. Cr Robinson: If the motion is carried, it will mean that no work will be gone on with for a twelve-month. Cr Golden: It will mean that only certain drains in which the Crown is interested can’t be gone on with. Mr Trapski seconded the motion, which was put to the meeting and lost by five votes to two, only the mover and seconder voting in favour of it.