TEKAPO LEAGUE.

Timaru Herald, Volume XCVIII, Issue 18084, 23 June 1924, Page 7

TEKAPO LEAGUE.

THE SUBSIDY QUESTION. VIEWS OF BUSINESS MEN. The Tekapo Development League, having hcaru that it is Uie imenuon ot me organiser to the Canterbury Progress league (Mr it. R. (Jiume; to wait tile nniuru Borough Council at its meeting to-night to ask lor a subsidy to the Canterbury Progress Ceague, has written to the Council stating in effect that it has no objection 10 the Council granting sucli a ] subsidy, but that if it does so the i J ckapo League will also expect a subsidy. Having heard that this letter had been sent to the Council, and that it > would come up lor discussion at tonight’s meetin gof that body, a representative of the “ Herald” obtained some views of business men j on the subject, on Saturday. ; Mr W. Johnston, local manager of the Bank of Australasia, expressed the ' opinion that Tekapo should bo exploited by local people, if investigation showed that it was worth exploiting, and present indications pointed to the fact that it was. It was pleasing ; to know that local people had suffi- ; cient faith in it, and were patriotic enough to find the money for an investigation of it, but if any public money was available for the purpose he certainly thought that it should be given by the Council to the Tekapo Development League. Mr B. L. Blodorn, manager of Herbert’s Ltd., said lie would not like to see money paid away to an outside organisation when it could be usefully applied to the furtherance of a local project which was calculated to be of great benefit to Timaru and the uvliole of South Canterbury. Ho was an ardent believer in Tekapo, but he was onlv a layman, and would like to see a report on it obtained from a reliable expert, at the earliest possible moment. ~ „ Mr William Gibb (president of the South End Ratepayers’ Association) i said ho had no objection to the Coun- i oil paying a subsidy to the Canterbury Progress League, as lie believed that body was likely to do good work in South Canterbury, but lie thought that if the Council did pay such a a subsidy, it should give one also to the Tekapo Development League, and if it could only afford to give one subsidy, preference should be given to the local League. He would very much ; like to see a report obtained upon the . Tekapo scheme. * Mr James Wilson, who lias already j obtained a report on the Tekapo pro- ! posals at a cost to himself of about C-iOU) -indicated that he is as sanguine as ever concerning a hydro-electric i supply from Lake Tekapo, which, he is j of opinion, is the only source from which South Canterbury is likely to get a service adequate for the needs of , the district. The Canterbury Progress League might do a certain measure of good for South Canterbury, but the "local League, formed for the express purpose of developing Tekapo, was more likely to exploit Tekapo without delay, and if any public money was available, it should be given to the Tekapo League. Mr F. C. May (president of the South Canterbury Chamber of Commerce) said that he was quite ■in favour of the Borough Council giving a subsidy to the Tekapo League lor the purpose of making an .investigation of that source of supply for limam and South Canterbury. I Mr T. It. McKay (president of _ the) North End Ratepayers’ Association) said lie was favourable to the _Canterbury Progress League extending its activities to South Canterbury, and considered that the Borough Council would be doing the right thing li it gave a subsidy for that purpose. At the sain© time he was a supporter of the Tekapo scheme, and considered that the Borough Council would do equally within its rights in granting a subsidy to the Tekapo Devohn nent League, if it gat%&,ono to the Canter-

bury Progress League. Mr Herbert Hall said that if the Borough Council granted a subsidy to the Canterbury Development League, the Tekapo League would insist on getting its share. For every £1 granted to the Progress League,_ £o should be granted bv the Council to the Tekapo League. There was ample patriotism in South Canterbury to ensure that money would be forthcoming for a project of this kind, and an appeal to the local bodies, for financial assistance was unnecessary, but it any money belonging to the ratopayeis ot Tnnaru is to be voted to a League with headquarters in Christchurch, the local Tekapo League should receive a much larger sum from die Borough Council. The principle ot depending upon local bodies tor assistance in matters ot tins kind, was

wrong, and while the TokapoLeague was prepared to be independent, it would certainly make a claim on the Borough funds, if the Council made a to an outside body. Mr T Thomson said that as far as tho development of Tokapo was concerned, Timaru should go ahead on its own, and not depend oil North Canterbury, or the Canterbury Progress

League,' at all. What was neeaeci ■na., concerted effort on the part of the people of South Canterbury; they Miould get together and each do ins best trAnake' South Canterbury a success on original lines. Asked lor his opinion on the subject of a sunsidv iL'om the Borough Council to the Canterbury Progress League Mr Jiiomson emphatically expressed the opinion that if any grant were to be made at all, the Tekapo Development League had the first claim on iC 1 ossi biy more money than they anticipated would be required for the investigation of Tekapo, and if the Borough Council was going to disburse any money it should be given to South Canterbury interests first. Mr 1C Shilhto said that as far as the development of Tekapo was concerned, South Canterbury could expect very little assistance front the Canterbury Progress League. For instance .Mr P.~ 11. Climio (organiser to the Canterbury Progress League), had been present by invitation at the initial meeting in Tnuiru on June 1-, but. had not been prepared to give the slightest assistance. 1 his had led -Mr Shillito to believe that Air Climie knew that the Canterbury Progress League would not be in sympathy with the "Tekapo movement. If that was so, no assistance could be expected from that quarter, and why, therclore, should the Canterbury Progress league be granted a subsidy lhe people of South Canterbury must bo self reliant, and help themselves, and he felt certain that if they all pulled together they could get on without outside assistance. The present position was that the Government had declared their intention of_ fixng a flat rate embracing all the State owned power schemes in New Zealand, and it was a well-known fact that the North Island systems were much more expensive than Lake Coleridge. The Christchurch City Council had thereupon obtained a report on the Wainvikariri scheme, and sought permission to develop it. The Government then offered to exempt tho City Council from the fiat rate. Lnder this ■mreement, Timaru would be paying a nmeh higher rate for power than Christchurch, and would bo m the unfortunate position of not being able to give South Canterbury manufacturers, who had to compete with the larger I centres as cheap power as could bo i supplied in Christchurch or Dunedin. The only wav to retrieve mi position,

said Mr Shillito, was for the whole of South Canterbury to pull together and develop Tekapo. Any subsidies paid by local bodies should go to the. Tekapo Development Loague, as the first duty of South Canterbury was to itself. , « Mr P. B. Foote, local manager of the Perpetual Trustees Company, said that as a believer in any movement for progress, he considered that the Canterbury Progress League should extend its" work to Smith Canterbury, but the form of its finance was open, to question. He did not think that any money should be paid by local bodies to any development league, but as a business man, he though that the newly-formed Tekapo League, whose objects had been clearly expressed, and the benefits of whose work would extend to all classes of the community, should have priority in the matter of subsidy from any public body, if any subsidy were to be given.