THE HARBOURS BILL.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 9934, 24 August 1910, Page 1

THE HARBOURS BILL.

PROTESTS AGAINST REPRESENTATION. CUT COUNCIL AND CANAL LEAGUE. A COMPROMISE SUGGESTED. [From Our Corbksfo.vdext.] t WELLINGTON, August 23. The Mayor of Christchurch (Mr C. Allison) and Mr T. N. Hnrsley, a deputation representing the Christchurch City , Council and the Christchurch Canal League, waited on the Minister of Marino (the Hon J. A. Millar) this afternoon to protest against several proposals contained in the Harbours Act Amendment Bill. Air T. H. Pavey introduced the deputation, and several Canterbury members were present . CHRISTCHURCH REPRESENTATION. Mr Allison said that great dissatisfaction existed in Christchurch and the districts immediately surrounding it at the present constitution of the Harbour Board, principally through the obstruction of tho majority of tho members to proposals having for their object the obtaining of reliable information on the financial aspect of the proposed ship canal. Tliey were strongly of opinion that if the Board had been equitably constituted the obstruction would not have occurred, and that the most equitable basis was the direct election by the people of all its members and the representation in proportion to population. As any district that bad a harbour'of its own should not be part of the district, Alcaroa, excepting where the county abutted on Lyttelton harbour, the new Waiwera County, and the Waimakariri harbour district should be excluded. The bodies represented on the deputation considered that the Amuri and Cheviot Counties should not have been added to the Lyttelton district. as these districts were being served by Port Robinson and Kaikoiira. The imports through Lyttelton for those places were very ■ small, lu any case, districts having harbours that partly served them should have much less representation. REPRESENTATION CRITICISED.

Government representation was objected to, Mr Allison said, as the Government took no responsibility for the liability or acts of the Board, while it had the privilege of using the Harbour Board's wharves and plant free of cost. The total expenditure of the Government on Lyttelton harbour was only £2160, in addition to £2885 spent by the Railway Department. This was the more unfair because the Government had spent £IOO,OOO 'on Timaru harbour, yet under tho present Act nine other Boards, in addition to Timaru, had no Government appointees, while under the, new .Bill six Boards were not to have Government appointees on them. They objected to the proposed special representation for payers of dues on ships and for payers of harbour dues other than on ships, these dues being ultimately paid/ by the consumers. They submitted that there was more community of interest between Lyttelton and Mount Herbert and part of the Akai'oa County than between Lyttelton and New Brighton, Woolston and Sumner, and that Lyttelton should be grouped with the firstmentioned districts and the Heathcote road district with.. .New Woolston and Sumner. THE VALUATION BASIS.

The deputation objected to representation on a valuation basis, for a population basis only would be equitable. For instance, Amuri and Cheviot Counties had a population of 3011 and a capital ratable value of £2,215,160, which gave a capital value of £135 per head of population. Mount Herbert County had a population of 470 and a capital ratable value of £314,553, which gave a capital value of £670 per head. Ghristchurcli had a population of 53,826 and a ratable value of £9,560,297, which gave ia capital value of £177 per head. Cheviot qnd Amuri had therefore 5.59 per cent of the population of Christchurch and 23.1 per cent of the ratable value. Mount Herbert County had .86 per cent of the population of Christchurch and 3.3 per cent of the ratable value-. It had been represented that country districts paid more per head in harbour charges than the city. In opposition to this Railway Return No. 12, for 1908, -showed that the Culverden Railway Station (which, in addition to serving the Culverden district, was also the final station to and from which goods from Cheviot and Amuri had to be taken) carried only a very small proportion of goods, the wharfage on which was

equal to not more than 3.06 shillings per head. He assumed that for this purpose Christchurch and suburbs ineluded the city, Woolston, Sumner and New Brighton boroughs and tho road districts of Avon, Heathcote, Spreydon, Halswell, Riccartoii, Templet on. and Lincoln. This population, paying £16,14.6 per annum, paid 3.94 shillings per head, or .90 shillings, or nearly lid. por head more than the counties of Amuri and Cheviot. On this basis Christchurch should elect B.ouji members and tho districts south and north of Christchurch 5.698 members. Under the Government Bill the first of these districts would have four or possibly five members, instead of eight, and the rural districts would have nine or ten members instead of 5.693. The canal area, with 81.908 electors, should have nine out of fourteen members. Christchurch, with -a population of 53,826, should elect six members. On the basis of nineteen members, as .at present, Christchurch alone should elect eight members, therefore either on a population basis or on the amount of wharfage the Bill only allotted Christchurch about 3ia.ll* the number of members due to it.

Mr G. Laurensou said that it was ridiculous to take Culverden as the distributing point for Cheviot, because the Cheviot line branched at Waipara and went on to Mina. Mr G. W. Forbes said that it was fallacious to argue that Cheviot and Amuri should be cut off from Lyttelton on the ground that they were served by Kaikoura. The nearest distance from Cheviot to Kaikoura was fifty miles over mountainous country, and from Amuri seventy-five miles. Lyttelton was the only outlet for the northern district. Mr Laurcnson said that many of Mr Joshua Little's figures quoted by Mr Allison were guesswork, and the exact figures could have been obtained from the Board, which had obtained them from the Railway Department. For every ton of imports there were four tons of exports. Mr Allison said that if the figures had been available the majority report of the Board's committee should havo used them. Mr T. E. Taylor said that the question was one of a population or a valuation basis, and Mr Allison's figures would stand investigation. Either a population or wharfage basis

would give Christchurch greater representation.

Mr. G. Witty said that instead of Amuri and Cheviot, Mr Allison should have instanced Selw.vn, Avitli its population of 24,000 - and capita] value of ten millions. Templeton, Riccarton, Halswell and Spreydon did not wish to be joined to < Christchurch, for that would swamp them.. Mr Allison had also added Belfast and Islington to Christchurch and credited Christchurch with the meat- exported from them. He had also overlooked the fact that a large quantity of the goods that entered Christ-church by rail were distributed by tract-ion engines, _ drays, and so on to the country districts.

Mr C. A. C. Hardy said that the producers' interests were paramount. Mr T. H. Davcy said that Mr Allison's figures were mainly correct. He had merely made the mistake ol suggesting that Cheviot was supplied from Culverden. As a matter of fact, the line, which branched at Waipara, -was known as the Culverden line, and the figures quoted were correct. Mr Davey went on to say that there would always be a difference of opinion regarding representation, and personally. he realised that an injustice would 1 be done- on a purely population basis. It was surely possible that the members in the area could come to some agreement by which both capital value and population would be fairly represented. Mr Taylor: Find the average between the two.

Mr Allison said that Mr "Witty's statement regarding Belfast and Islington was incorrect, for in tho figures lie liad* quoted lie had not given Christchurch credit for a penny' in connection with wool, meat or grain. Regarding Mr. Davey's suggestion of a compromise, lie must' point out that the valuation, of districts such as Mount Herbert, which simply yielded dairy produce and wool, should be discounted by about 75 per cent. For the rest the matter could be left safely to local members. THE MINISTER'S REPLY. . The Hon J. A. Millar promised to give the matter consideration, but added that he would not agree to a population basis of representation any more than to a valuation basis. Tho desire of the move was to equalise tlw city and country representation. It would be time enough to speak on the canal question when the Bill came bofore Parliament, for nothing could be done until there was legislative authority. Mr Davev had made a wise suggestion, and ho did-not mind how the schedule was drawn up as long as both sides got fair representation, and kept the number down to fourteen. The Government was going to maintain its nominee in every case where there had been a Government nomine© originally. In tho case of Lyttclton, also, the Government had largo railway interests, to the extent of about £350,000, which constituted a strong reason for Government representation. The deputation then withdrew.