WELLINGTON HARBOUR BOARD.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 9759, 28 January 1910, Page 1

WELLINGTON HARBOUR BOARD.

RECENT EXPENDITURE. CANDID CRITICS AMONG THE MExVIBERS. [Per Press Association.] WELLINGTON, January 27. To-day, at the monthly meeting of the Harbour Board the chairman (Mr T. M. Wilford, M.P., gave a review of the harbour management and progress during his two years' tenure of office. The policy, he said, had been one of caution, with a due regard for«expansion. After mentioning various matters of finance he suggested that there should be a revaluation of the Board's assets. On September 30 the balance of assets over liabilities was over £1,000,000. The chairman instanced one case in which a property owned by the Board, assessed at £BOOO, was worth £16,000. Regarding interest the Board paid on loan moneys expended or waiting expenditure last yeaT £27,498, and in addition it put aside about £SOOO towards sinking fund. These were the first calls on the Board's income of £165,422. He thought that the engineer's commitments for the next year should bo cut down. Even if this was done it would be still necessary to secure extra revenue. "In regard to the necessary increases at present," he explained, " it must be remembered that importers and exporters on the one hand, and shipping owners on the other ( contribute practically in equal'moieties. It will'be the duty of the new Board to decide on its policy to provide the necessary revenue on an equitable basis between the two. There is still room in some oases for increases, at the same time maintaining the position of the port as the cheapest distributing centre of the dominion."

Mr R. Fletcher remarked that though the revenue had fallen away the expenditure had been kept up. The removal of the Falcon shoal was the only good work done by the Board during the year, but he admitted that some of the works which he disapproved of were legacies from the past. He described the King's Wharf as "absolutely useless." He did not know what the Clyde Quay Wharf was for, and nobody in Wellington could tell him what it was for. Then there was Miramar. "It is a pity we ever had anything to do with it, ' he commented. "We all recognise that now." There had been wasteful expenditure and bad management in the past. Wellington was a natural harbour, but on present appearances it was going to be the dearest port south of the line. ' Whether the Board raised its charges against ships or importers, the bill would be eventually passed on to the consumer. He protested against the Board's habit of persistently going into committee to consider matters or public interest. Mr C. W. Jones said the members of the Board had been associated with " a capable, impartial, hard working chairman." Mr Jones combated the statement that if the charges against ships were raised the extra levy could be passed on to the public. Dr Newman (Mayor of Wellington) said he entirely agreed with the remarks of Mr Fletcher. " The more I learn of the Board's business, the more I am horrified," he said. " There has been extravagant expenditure of the deepest dye. It is idle to disguise the fact that when the works now in hand are finished there will be a large taxation oil shipping, destroying the life blood of the shipping." He characterised the Petone wharf (£11,000) as " perfectly useless." Thousands of pounds had been wasted on " useless cranes, lying about the wharves." Then there was " the large amount for the useless dock, which can never pay its way, and the still more extravagant expenditure on Miramar, a sheer waste of money." Dr Newman submitted that the effect of the charges that would have to be levied to cover the cost of these various enterprises would bo to drive away shipping, and Wellington depended largely on the shipping. In various respects, especially the working of cargoes, the operations were not as economical as possible. There were too many heads of departments. The present engineer (Mr Marchbanks), who had been brought up in a good school, should be made general manager. Mr J. G. Harkness said Dr Newman was too pessimistic in his view of the position. The Hon T. K. Maodonald said that he was astonished that one with a naturally hopeful temperament like Dr Newman should have got into a state of indecision and funk respecting the trade of the city.

The chairman, in reply, said that where the Board had erred was in a too somnolent acquiescence in official reports, ~ and probably that complaint could be cured by greater attention to the detailed reports submitted to the Board. No member of the Board was a practioal engineer and when an officer of the Board handed in a report giving an estimate of cost of a particular work, that estimate must be accepted by the Board. The criticism was not levelled at the administration »f affairs, but at wrong estimates which had been made and commitments that had already beau incurred. Thus they should let the lesson of the past be a guide for the future. Dr Newman had been far too pessimistic in his review of the Board's affairs. It could not be said that the Board had lost its head during a time of trouble, for it had not created one new work but only hurried on commitments already made. Regarding committee work, there was a

great quanity of work that could not be openly discussed, but the faot should not be lost sight of that there was nothing discussed in committee that was not subsequently brought before the open Board. It was, however, a question for the Board itself, for it only had to alter its by-laws. "I am first of all a New Zealander," said Mr Wilford, in conclusion, " and secondly one of those who believe in the progress of the EmEire Oitv. I haven't' ' blown' on bealf of tne Board. I have had every opSortunity, but at the same time I say hat with the facilities at© give for quick transit and otherwise we are the cheapest port in the dominion."