TIMARU HARBOUR POLICY.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXIX, Issue 20066, 25 March 1935, Page 6

TIMARU HARBOUR POLICY.

After months of discussion and controversy, the precise positibn of the chairman of the Timaru Harbour Board has been revealed in relation to harbour improvement policy. At the meeting of the Board on Friday, a resolution was carried unanimously, setting up a committee 1o “further examine Captain White’s scheme.” The attitude of the majority of the members of the Board, it is well for the people of Timaru and South Canterbury to realise, is not expressed in that resolution. The chairman of the Board made his position perfectly plain in a single sentence of interjection he threw into the case for progress being propounded by the mover of the resolution. “I was not keen on any scheme,” declared Mr Dawson. Moreover, the chairman of the Board in an effort to lull the fears of some of the nonprogressive members of the Board, put some cards on the table which disclose the extremes to which he is prepared to go in the hope of defeating any progressive move, that is likely to be attempted by the Timaru members of the Board, supported by those country members who can see plain danger in the policy

being pursued by the majority of the members of the Board. The following excerpt from the report of the debate on the resolution submitted for the consideration of the Board on Friday, speaks for itself: Mr Garrick: The personnel of the committee requires some explanation.

Mr Goodman said that he had not thought only of those who had voted against the motion at the last meeting. Mr Garrick: The chairman has not got a chance amongst the crowd of you.

Mr Goodman: There is nothing behind it at all. It would be very difficult for country members to get in to a number of meetings.

Mr Orbell: It is practically the Standing Committee. Mr Garrick: Do you fellows think you know more about the harbour than we do, just because we voted against you?

Mr Goodman: No. We put Mr Dawson on because he will keep us in order. Mr Garrick: You can’t put those yarns across me. They are too thin. The chairman: As regards my having no hope on the committee, Mr Garrick, I am not altogether hopeless. (Laughter.) Mr Garrick: You will have no hope.

The chairman: “What about my auxiliaries, the Royal Commission, House of Representatives, Local Bills Committee, Legislative Asembly, Local Loans Board and the ratepayers? The Board is the first hurdle.”

It is just as well that the people ! of South Canterbury wlio are not blind to obvious facts, in relation to the trend of harbour policy in New Zealand, particularly tiie scheme for harbour centralisation and tlie determined campaign being conducted with the objective of concentrating the selling of wool in the larger centres, should wake up to the actual position of harbour affairs in South Canterbury. The chairman of the Board has at last confessed that lie is “not keen on any scheme,” and he lias deliberately thrown out a plain threat to the members of the Boai’d who favour keeping in step with the harbour needs of the times with a watchful eye on the future, that lie will meet them with all tlie auxiliaries that he thinks be can influence in the hope of defeating any move being embarked upon bv tlie progressive members that does not please him. One of the members of the Board who spoke in support of a progressive policy being embarked upon, declared that if members of the Board do not get something done the people would put somebody on the Board who would. “Is that a threat?” demanded the chairman sharply. The member of the Board who spoke did not satisfy tlie chairman’s quest for information. But if the member had reminded the chairman that the electors in whose service he sits on the Timaru Harbour Board are in the habit of administering salutary lessons to their! representatives whom they adjudge guilty of ignoring their wishes, he would have given emphatic point to his plain statement of fact without holding out any threat. The chairman of the Harbour Board now stands before the people of Timaru and South Canterbury as a representative of Timaru, who is “not keen on any scheme,” and who .openly threatens to call up all tlie auxiliaries that are available to defeat any progressive move that does not meet with liis approval. At tills moment of tlie year, the people of South Canterbury in general, and the people of Timaru in particular, whom Mr Dawson represents on tlie Harbour Board, ought not to be gulled by mere discussion and wordy controversy. The chairman of the Harbour Board lias thrown into the teeth of progressive members of the Board, the boldest of challenges. He is not keen on any scheme of harbour improvement and he has made up his mind to leave no stone unturned in liis determination to defeat any progressive move that does not harmonise with the line of action, or rather inaction, he regards as sufficient to meet the present and future harbour needs of South Canterbury. Those members of the Board who are responsible for the resolution now standing on the records of the Board’s proceedings to “defer taking action in regard to Captain White’s harbour improvement suggestions,” have rendered themselves open to strong criticism if not ridicule, by now approving of the setting up of a committee “to further examine Captain White’s suggested harbour improvements.” In a word the Board lias by resolution deferred consideration of the scheme, and by another resolution it lias agreed to the setting up of a committee to consider the scheme and make a report. The attitude of the majority of the members of the Board was plainly disclosed in the strong opposition they showed to the rescinding of the resolution to do nothing, and yet the Board by unanimous vote appointed a committee, including the chairman, to further examine Captain White’s suggestions for harbour improvements, although the chairman made it clear that he is “not keen on any scheme”!