BOARD RESTRAINED

Taranaki Daily News, 13 November 1934, Page 9

BOARD RESTRAINED

COLLECTION OF SEPARATE RATE. PALMERSTON NORTH ELECTRICITY. By Telegraph—Press Association. Wellington, Nov. 12. The Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers, delivered judgment to-day in the case of the Mayor, councillors and citizens of Palmerston North, and A. E. Mansford, plaintiffs, against the Manawatu-Oroua Power Board. The Chief Justice said the real question in the case as he viewed it was whether the plaintiff city was entitled to an injunction to restrain the board from levying, enforcing, or collecting a separate rate imposed on Palmerston North. Traversing the agreement, he said that in effect the city was to obtain power at the same price as the board itself paid the Government, plus a service charge of £2OO a quarter, with certain additions which ’he need not indicate in detail. The effect was that the city was able to supply electricity to its inhabitants at lower prices than those the board charged consumers within other portions of its area. The city had its own plant, which was still required for standby purposes, and its own reticulation, the whole cost of which had been borne by the city. The advantageous position of the citizens gave rise th dissatisfaction in other parts of the board’s district, bringing about the formation of an association called the Manawatu-Oroua Electricity Consumers’ Association, formed for the purpose of forcing the city to abandon the consumers desired by the promoters of the association. An endeavour was made to induce the city to sell its undertaking to the board and join in the board’s scheme, so- that the inhabitants of the city would pa; the same price as the country consumers. If that endeavour failed there, would be an effort to obtain legislation to achieve that result. If that too was unsuccessful then a separate rate was to be levied on the city. The Chief Justice went on to speak of the subsequent election of a ticket of the association’s nominees. After the election in May, 1932, one of the first things the board did was to appoint an, executive committee, consisting of seven, five of whom had just been pledged to the association’s aims. The idea of constituting an executive committee consisting of a majority of the board was new. The results almost inevitably would be that whatever decisions or recommendations the executive committee made would, practically with certainty, be confirmed or adopted by the board.

The board was foiled in the first two of its aims, that of purchase and of obtaining legislation. The majority of the board, according to programme, proceeded with a third aim. He could not impute to the' Legislature an intention to authorise a board, after entering into an honourable commercial agreement, by means of a deliberately self-imposed increase of the estimated deficiency and the exercise .of rating power to take away benefits conferred by the agreement because -it found agreement unsatisfactory and objectionable to some of its constituents. He held that the injunction must be allowed to the extent of restraining the board from giving effect to a ’. from enfofeir.. collecting a separate rate.