PUAHUE ROADING SCHEME

Waipa Post, Volume 32, Issue 1782, 13 July 1926, Page 5

PUAHUE ROADING SCHEME

MINISTER INCREASES SUBSIDY. HITCH IN THE PROPOSAL 'EXPLAINED. Writing to Monday’s meeting of the Waipa County Council, the Hon. K. S. Williams, Minister for Public Works, wrote re the 'Puahue Soldiers’ Settlement roads, as under:—“As you are aware provision was made in the Public Works roads estimates for last financial year in the tsum of £BOO (£2 for £1) in connection with the proposed metalling work on the main road through the Puahue Soldiers’ Settlement. Authorisation of this item was, of course, deferred on account of limitation of available funds, bu,t under date November 30th, 1925, an intimation was conveyed to the soldier settlers that if they were successful in arranging their quota of the cost and your council was prepared) to undertake the work, the Government’s subsidy of £BOO (£2 for £1) would be made available after the cldse of last financial year. Mr R. W. Simson, representing the Puahue Soldiers’ Settlement, recently communicated with me advising that a more extensive scheme is now contemplated, and on an estimated cost of £4OOO he requested the provision of a Government subsidy amounting to £ISOO (£2 for £1) and £IOOO (£5 for £1). The whole position has accordingly received investigation by my 'Department and I am advised that it provides for the 'expenditure of £1450 on metalling the main road' through the settlement and for the expenditure of £3OO on Cowan’s road, £950 on Judd’te road, £7OO on Hastie’s road, and £650 on .Cooper’s road, a total of £4050. I am also advised that in its application for Government grants in connection with this year’s roads estimates your council has made application to the district engineer, Auckland, for a re-vote of last year’s items of £BOO (£2 for £1), together with £IOO on account of £1735 (£2 for £1) in connection with the other items apart from the main road,- This, of course, would represent a total Government subsidy of practically the same amount as that requested by the settlers, but after careful consideration of the position I am of opinion that the settlers’ scheme is the better of the ■two. I have accordingly to-day advised Mr Simson that/when this year’s 'estimates come before me I shall endeavour to make provision for an item of £BOO on account pf £ISOO (£2 for £1) and £IOO on account of £IOOO (£1 for £1). Your council will, of course, recognise that limitation of available finance will prohibit the provision during one financial year of the total amount of the Government’s suggested quota, and in any case in fairness to other parts of the county I assume that it would be impossible for your council to complete the scheme in connection with the Puahue settlement during any one year. It would appear desirable for the scheme to be spread over a period of at lealst three years and a suggestion to this effect is accordingly conveyed, to .your council’s consideration. It (is assumed that the intimation contained herein of the extent to which the 'Government is prepared to assist will enable further action to be now taken an connection wi't'h the raising of the required loan .to provide the amount of the settlers’ quota.’’ The County solicitors, advising on the proposal, pointed out that a considerable portion of the area of the special rating district is Crown land leased to various discharged soldiers. iSo long as it, is occupied, Crown land is rateable "property and] liable to a special rate. If the occupier is unable to pay, however, the land cannot be ■sold and the council can only, apply to the Crown Lands Board to forfeit the occupier’s lease. , Messrs W. G. Park and R. W. Simteon attended as a deputation on behalf of the settlers. Mr Simson said when he promoted the scheme he had had no id,ea that there were any disabilities owing to the majority of the settlers being returned soldiers, and thus their holdings woufldi not be pledged as security for repayment of a special loan. The chairman said the Council would' not have good enough security to warrant its proceeding with the proposal. Mr Simlson pointed out that Puahue Settlement is a solid prosperous one. There was very little likelihood of the guarantees being negligible. The settlers in the special area, affected comprised half soldiers and half civilians. It was imperative that the road,s be improved. The main roads were little use if the side roads were impassable. The promoters wanted the side roads tackled first. The settlers were not likely to’ “walk off” their holdings, and were legularly paying rates.

The chairman said the Council was anxious to help, but it owed a responsibility to the other settlers in the county. The whole matter had been considered by the County’s Finance Committee, and it would he considered by the Counties’ Association this month. The Minister tor Lands would, also be asked to alter the legislation so as to providla for a lien on property as a guarantee against special loans. If the Government would shoulder its responsibilities just as a private vendor of land had to, there would be little trouble. He believed that many councils would make representations on the same lines to the Minister, but Waipa County representatives would also make a special request for assistance in the Pun.hue settlement. Mr Park said the civilian settlers were keenly in favour of the project. The Iso Idler settlers were of good repute, who paid their dues, and, therefore they did not want to be penalised by comparison with civilian settlers. Cr. Storey said the Council was only hesitating on a matter of principle, and of duty to th'e other ratepayers in the county. It was not fair to them to take the risk. Councillors suggested that Mr Simson should accompany the delegation to Wellington to state to the Minister for Lands the viewls of the soldier settlers.

Mr Simson expressed his willingness to go if needed, but he could not well spare tire time. The deputation then thanked, the Council and withdrew.