Taranaki Herald. FRIDAY, APRIL 10, 1908. OPUNAKE AND THE HARBOUR BILL.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LIV, Issue 13672, 10 April 1908, Page 4

Taranaki Herald. FRIDAY, APRIL 10, 1908. OPUNAKE AND THE HARBOUR BILL.

♦ ■ At a meeting at Opun&ke on Wednesday, convened by Mr. A. H. Moore, a motion hostile to the New Plymouth Harbour Bill was carried by fourteen Toteh to eight. It uaay be that no very great significance attaches to the meeting, yet it demands some notice. The convenor, •in liis •address, delvQd into history, though not altogether accurately if he is correctly reported in the Hawe^'a Star. He recalled "that when £75,000 was required in 1880 it was stated that that sum could not be done without, but up to the present, tiirie the Board had got on without it, and was in an immeasurably superior position as regards funds to what it was in 1880." It was in 1885 that a second loan was first suggested, and »the amount ' asked for was £60,000, At the end of 1880 the Board had £153,000 in the bank, bearing, interest. The new loan was required to build a wharf and to extend the breakwater 500 feet, and the proposal was approved at Hawera, Stratford and Ingle wood, while, Manaia joined with Opunake in .opposing it. The work then proposed has practically been 'completed, without a loan, it is true, the funds coming from what was known as released sinking fund (though this was a misnomer, for it was not sinking fund at all) in the first place, and more recently from ordinary revenue, the total spent on new w,ork from these two sources being about £50,000. Touching sinking fund, Mr. Moore seemed to find fault with the Board for not carrying out its powers "to the full,, contending that if it had provided a, sinking fund *'it would nave wiped out the whole I6an by this time." He surely forgets that for d while the Board was unable to meet the interest charges in full, though levying ftbe full rate. For six years, from 1890 to 1896, the Board was in arrears, so that for that period at any rate it cannot be charged with neglect in not setting aside a sinking fund. In J895 the country Board reduced the rate, and since then tKe full

rate lias never been collected. , ' It was, of course, competent for. the Board from that time onwards to have resumed payment of sinking fund, but we think the country preferred the reduced rate. / So much for history, now for the Bill and Mr. Moore's objections to it- With regard to the exclusion of Waitara, it was his opinion, he said, that "if six Bills were necessary Waitara should not be allowed to avoid its fair responsibilities . ' ' We explained some time ago that if the Waitara district had been retained in the rating area the most it would be likely to be called upon to pay by way of rate was £125 a year, j while in the event of a new loan being raised under two Acts 1 the fact that the second loan would be in the nature of a second mortgage would increase the annual charges ,£575. Thus by holding Waitara to its present responsibilities the Board, would, gain £125- and lose £575. Can there be any doubt as to which' was the most businesslike course to take? Then Mr. Moore claimed, that if a rate is not\ likely to be ''collected the exemption of an area valued at £2,000,000 around Opunake would not affect the^ New Plymputh Board at all. He ought to be financier enough to know that the reduction of the rateable value of 'the security offered for a new-loan by so large a sum as £2,000,000 would / be likely to appreciably affect \ the terms obtained. His next objection was, that the sinking: fund suggestion was totally inadequate. We do not see what more the Board can do, unless it were to levy a rate specially to provide sinking fund. That might be Mr. Moore Vpolicy, but we do not think it would meet with general acceptance. • W^iy should we of to-day pay for the construction o^ the harbour , for ihe belief it of future generations ? The idea of £300,000 being sui* ficient for the harbour was ridiculed by Mr r . Moore, who pictured a fleet of coasting vessels plying up and vdown the coast witlr New Plymouth* fits -head^uar* ters, and ironworks, repairing! sheds, and so on situated here. Time enough- to discuss that when the demand t^ises. All that is sought* now* is power to increase the loan fa £300,000, which will provide accommodation" enough for many years. When more money is wanted it will be for the ratepayers of that time to vote it or not. Then Mr. Moore spo^e of the loan proposals being "bolstered up" by the Chairman of the Board 1 in stating tEat £26,000 was required, for a new dredge, while the engineer's estimate was £ld*,ooo. Well, Mr.' Connett "bolstered" the proposals down again by showing that the breakwater extension was costing less than £50 per 4:oot, ! instead of £75 as estimated by the engineer, so that one squares the other. J3ut it may be mentioned that the engineer's, estimate was made eight years ago; he would ,not now expect io get what is required for £16,000. The representation Otf the Harbour Board was the next grievance, Mr. Moore describing it as grossly, unfair that Hawera with its large valuation had only one member. The Hawera wafd has only recently exceeded in valuation the North Taranaki war<l, which has also. only, one member. Taranaki South, to which our critic belongs, has also one member with a valuation less than half that of Hawera. , If 'the Government's new Bill becomes law there will have, to be a readjustment of boundaries. In the meantime, however, the inequalities (which are unavoidable) have not given an undue advantage to any party. There are. several other points in Mr Moore's speech to which we would like to refer, but our space is exhausted for today.