Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CORRESPONDENCE.

PENAL POWER CHARGES.

Sir, —The Power Board chairman's remarks re a resolution received from the Farmers' Union, call for explanation. The resolution referred to was passed at a meeting of the union executive held prior to the meeting of the Board at which the chairman gave a notice of motion to reduce charges, but inadvertently was not recorded by the Board in time for that meeting and also was not included in the report of the union meeting in your journal. The chairman, as reported by you, stated in one breath that the horse-power charge on milking motors is not a penal charge, and in the next admits that it is and attempts to exp'ain why it is necessary. The only comprehensible explanation for this charge is that it is an easy method of collecting a fixed revenue from that unfortunate section of consumers who, through force of circumstances, are compelled to use motors to drive milking plants or separators, the Board being a monopoly can enforce the charge. Not all milking motors are in use during the same hours, some being finished as early as 6.30 a.m., and correspondingly early in the afternoon. It would be quite as' equitable to make a fixed charge for stoves according to size, as most of them are in use during the same hours, as a large number of milking motors. If the horse-power or fixed charge is necessary on account of cost of reticu'ation in country districts, why are not users other than those of milking motors required to helo to pay in proportion? MiJohnston's statement to the contrary notwithstanding, the dairy-farmers, even after the charge has been reduced will still be raying £2816 10s penal h.p. charges. If the charge were abolished and it were found necessary to substitute a higher unit charge over all users, the on ] y dairyfarmers to whom it would be disadvantageous as compared with present charges, would be the comparatively few with very large herds, who are at present in the fortunate position of being able to do their work with the same horse-power motor as farmers with herds, in many cases, less than half the size.—l am, etc., G. T. CRAWLEY.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAIPO19310324.2.39

Bibliographic details

Waipa Post, Volume 42, Issue 3276, 24 March 1931, Page 5

Word Count
367

CORRESPONDENCE. PENAL POWER CHARGES. Waipa Post, Volume 42, Issue 3276, 24 March 1931, Page 5

CORRESPONDENCE. PENAL POWER CHARGES. Waipa Post, Volume 42, Issue 3276, 24 March 1931, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert