MAY AFFECT HARBOURS

Stratford Evening Post, Volume IV, Issue 146, 2 June 1936, Page 3

MAY AFFECT HARBOURS

Primary Products Marketing Bill DROP IN REVENUE FEARED. Press Association —Copyright. Curistehurch, June 1. Fears that the passing of the Primary Products Marketing Bill, whereby all butter and cheese from New Zealand will be exported as the property of the Crown, may involve harbour boards in a considerable loss of revenue, were expressed by Mr, E. J. Howard, M.P., retiring chairman of the Lyttelton Harbour Board, at a meeting of .the board to-day. Mr. Howard emphasised that under the legislation already on the Statute Book all Crown goods were exempt from the payment of harbour dues, and if the Bill became law in its present form it would be possible in some circumstances for the Government Audit Office to plead this exemption in relation to dairy produce. He was not altogether reassured by statements by the Minister of Finance, the Hon. W. Nash, to the Harbours' Association that harbour boards would not suffer through the passing of the Bill.

The clanger was not so much in .the general provisions of the Bill, which made dairy produce Crown property when it was placed aboard a ship for export, for in that case dues would already have been paid before the Crown took over, said Mr. Howard. There was a proviso, however, that the Minister might deem produce to be Crown property at any stage before shipment, and it was in such cases that harbour boards were likely to be affected. A letter from Mr. Nash to the Harbours' Association, dated May 14, stated that it was definitely the intention of the Government that harbour boards shouid not suffer through the passing of the Primary Products Marketing Bill. As long as the Government continued to acquire the title to dairy produce at the f.o.b. point wharfage and other harbour dues were payable by factories, as at present. Even if the title to the goods were taken at an earlier point, having regard to the provisions cf section 78 of the Harbours Act, it was clear that the position cf harbour boards would not be prejudiced, for in that case harbour dues would be payable by the State.

Mr. Nash's letter continued that he had obtained an opinion from the Crown Law office en the matter, and he was assured that no further legislation was required to prevent harbovr boards sufjfii ing loss by the passing of the Bill. T.ii.. ruling was binding on departments of State, so that in any case where dues were payable by the Crown there would be no difficulty about their payment. "I know that the intention of the Minister is as stated in the letter," said Mr. Howard. "He has promised legislation if it affects us, yet the Crown Law Office is not binding, as has been proved in the past. The Audit Office, which has to act on legislation as it stands, is the one that counts. The Harbours' Association Ls watching the position closely."