A BIG PROBLEM

Southland Times, Issue 20204, 15 June 1927, Page 6

A BIG PROBLEM

POWER BOARD RATES DEPUTATION FROM NONRETICULATED AREAS SOME PLAIN SPEAKING “A nightmare - ’ was the description given to the Power Board rate imposed on the non-reticulated areas by one of the deputation which waited on the board yesterday. From all parts of the province these ratepayers with a grievance came, with the result that the board room could scarcely contain the deputation. Some plain speaking was indulged in but matters at no time grew heated, even though all the board was able to do was to express its sympathy with those in the outer area. Mr. Adam Hamilton, Member of Parliament for Wallace, said that he had been asked to introduce the deputation. Naturally the non-reticulated ratepayers had his sympathy and the sympathy of most on the board. At the beginning of the scheme it had been generally understood that there would be a different rate for the reticulated and non-reticulated ratepayers. The board had not been able to see its way clear to do that for various reasons, with the result that there were people labouring under a certain sense of injustice. Legally these people might not be able to get redress, but they felt that they would like to put their case before the board and see if they could get justice from them. He had noticed from the papers that a number of ratepayers had to be brought to court. Probably some of these were from the non-reticulat-ed area. (A voice: “They were.”). He knew there was a sort of organised opposition among certain of the ratepayers in the non-reticulated areas and he considered it desirable that if possible that dissatisfaction be removed, so that the working of the board would be rendered smoother. He knew the board would give the deputation a sympathetic hearing and would relieve them of the burden if possible. He had felt that he wished to make these few remarks, but the spokesmen of the deputation would cover the ground fully. A REDUCTION WANTED. Mr. Blatch was the first speaker from the deputation. He said that they had come before the board to ask for a reduction in their rate. When the scheme had been inaugurated and voted for it was understood by the electors that all would be reticulated. The board had not seen fit to reticulate all areas, possibly for financial reasons. A great many unreticulated ratepayers were paying very heavy rates. The understanding had been given that they would be reticulated and he considered that the board as at present constituted was morally responsible to carry out the promises of the promoters of the scheme. At the present time they were simply paying heavy rates for the benefit of those who were reticulated. Mr. Blatch said that that was not British justice or justice of any description. They had come to ask the board either to reticulate them or to reduce the rate to as low as l-Bd. in the £. They did not think that such a request was unfair. As he did not think that he and others far away from the lines would be reticulated for a great many years he considered that the step the board should take was to reduce the rate. Mr. Paterson said that all well knew he had taken up a fighting attitude in regard to the Power Board and the heavy rate they were called upon to pay. Men such as he away in the backblocks could get no benefit whatever from the scheme, yet were called upon to pay large sums to help those nearer civilisation. It was a burning question with them and he felt very strongly on the matter. BURDEN OF THE BACK BLOCKER. Mr. Cochran said that in rating them as the board did a great burden was put on the land. Speaking personally, the rate put the equivalent of a £lOOO mortgage on his place. The rating in the unreticulated area seemed obviously unfair. Mr. Jeffs mentioned how the board had at its inception said what a great help the power was going to be to women folk in the backblocks. As it was, the rate on the unreticulated area inflicted great hardship on the women, for domestic help could not be secured when such a burden was imposed by the rate. It was too heavy a price to pay to help those near civilisation. Mr. Hamilton briefly spoke again. He repeated that all those present came from the backblocks and had large areas, with consequent large rates, which were paid practically for nothing. The reticulated ratepayers received a benefit from their rate for they got the power, but the nom reticulated ratepayers were non-benefit men. Personally he had thought that for one year the rate might have been borne, but they had had two years of it now. There was no good going to come of it if a section of the community were made dissatisfied. Even ratepayers in the reticulated areas were willing that the non-reticu-lated ratepayers should be relieved of some of their burden. He could not but feel in sympathy with the request of the deputation. MR. KINCHEV'S REPLY. Mr. Hinchey said that the board appreciated the position clearly and all members were in sympathy with the ratepayers concerned. But the board had its difficulties too. The revenue had to be built up, and was being built up; but it had to be built up a great deal more yet before the rates could be removed. The board’s intention this year had been to strike two rates so as to afford the unreticulated areas as much relief as possible. Unfortunately there had been a great deal of work attached to preparations for striking two rates. For some time the draughtsmen had been working at it. That had been completed a little time ago and the board had been ready to proceed to afford relief to the unreticulated areas when the board’s solicitors who had been given the maps and documents had advised the board that a great many difficulties were in the way, preventing the board from striking two different rates. The board felt, therefore, that it w’ould have to forego striking two rates this year. To strike a general and a separate rate all non-reticulated sections in all the areas had to be mapped out and clearly defined in accordance with the Act, and it had not been found possible to do that, and overcome all the difficulties. The best the board could do was to reduce the general rate by l-Bd. compared with last year. Mr. Hinchey mentioned that when the board took the matter up last year with the Government the board wanted to have their way made clear for them to make a differential rate, but objection had been raised. The board now wanted an amendment to the Act so that matters would be simplified and the difficulties encountered at present overcome. A rate of $d in the £ was as low as they could get this year. They could only carry an overdraft allowed by the Loans Board. SOME QUESTIONS. It was evident that not a few among the deputation had been optimistic concerning the result, of their representations, for the chairman’s remarks proved rather a blow. After a brief pause there followed fifteen minutes of questions and answers. Mr. Hinchey: The board feels the position quite as much as you, I can assure you, gentlemen. Mr. Paterson: Oh. No! We have to pay. Mr. Hinchey: We also have to pay rates. A member of the deputation asked if they could not be reticulated. Then they would pay gladly. Mr. Hinchey said that reticulating was a matter of capital cost. They would certainly reticulate as far as possible, but financial reasons made it hard to reticulate | more than a few places.

is investigating all claims. Mr. Hinchey then referred to the proposal from Members of Parliament asking for relief. If anything were done in the way of relief, he could assure them that the nonreticulated areas would be the first to get the benefit of such relief. Mr. Patterson: We were antagonistic before and the board hasn’t relieved that feeling. However, we ll discuss the matter further ourselves. Mr. Hinchey: I am sorry I have not improved the positon. Mr. Patterson : You’ve made it worse. Continuing Mr. Hinchey said that the board was endeavouring to do its best for all parties concerned. They were governed by regulations and laws that they could not get beyond. A voice: Is the legal opinion against relief ? Mr. Hinchey said that the legal opinion was that it was too late to strike two rates this year. A voice: Wasn’t it too late last year also? Another voice: Who are the board’s solicitors ? Mr. Hinchey: Messrs Macalister Brothers. When Mr. Cochran said that last year relief had been promised just as it had been that day, Mr. Hinchey replied by stating that the board honestly thought that it could be done this year. It had been the board’s intention to reduce the non-reticu-lated rate to 5-Bd., but they had found they could not do it. Mr. Hamilton mentioned the unfortunate position the non-reticulated people were placed in when they could not get redress through the law or from the board. A voice: I ask you straight, Mr. Hinchey, can the position go on indefinitely like this? If it does we’ll all be in the soup. Mr. Hinchey: The work was not completed until a short time ago and the legal opinion came in only a few days ago and was not known to members till to-day’s meeting. The board expected to pass the resolution giving relief to-day but could not in face of the legal opinion. Mr. Campbell, the board's secretary, said that it was not exactly a question of legal opinion. The resolution embodying the definitions of all the areas had been prepared in the office but was not ready till June 4. It had then been handed to the solicitors who had advised that they did not think the definitions were sufficient and that they could not get them ready in time to strike a rate for this year. The requirements of the law made it a very difficult matter to get the exact definitions. The delay had not been occasioned by the solicitors but by the time the work had taken in the office. Mr. Royds asked why the matter had not been referred to the solicitors for opinion in a general way long before, to which Mr. Hinchey replied that they had to submit the completed documents to the solicitors. The deputation then thanked the board for having given them a courteous hearing, and withdrew. Later at the conclusion of the board meeting Mr. C. A. Henderson asked the chairman if the delay in placing the documents defining the areas in the solicitors’ hands was caused through an omission of the staff. Mr. Campbell at the request of the chairman explained the position and satisfied members that the draughtsman had worked as expeditiously as possible.