LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 19793, 17 March 1927, Page 6

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

(Letters for this column must be writtrn concisely as possible, otherwise they may be abridged, or crowded out.) HARBOUR MATTERS Sir, —After showing that the statements of tho Harbour Board’s chairman —re stevedoring the “Bronnoy” are incorrect, I am now at liberty to deal with matters of more importance to the public concerning harbour affairs, ft must be quite evident to the most casual observer, and reader of your report of the Harbour Board meeting on the*llth inst., that the finances of the Board are in such a state that, within a very short period, we shall have «. harbour rate struck. I cannot understand the attitude of the county members, especially, who have allowed rtie Board to get in this position, when, 1 am quite sure, the only reason they have been elected to the Board is to prevent such a catastrophe as a rate being struck in the Wanganui harbour rating area.

The present as per the report of the chairman and Mr Higginbottom regarding the finances of the Boaiu only bears out my contention that the members of the Board know only that which Mr Bignell reports ?o them regarding the position of tne management—or mismanagement—of the Board’s affairs. There are so manythin gs in the report presented by Mr 'Bignell and Mr Higginbottom at the lost meeting of the Board that it would be impossible for me to traverse the whole of them in this letter. I, therefoie, propose to ideal with items as they appear to me in the matter of importance to the general public. I would like to deal, firstly, with tho matter of dredging. I notice, in the report published by you, the chairman pointed •out that the heavy cost of dredging had not been anticipated and no one had expected the silting to take place in the basin after it had been dredged on. Therefore he said, dredging came under the heading of harboir const? uction. These are the chairman’s words as reported by you. 1 have no cause for complaint, so far as the original dregding out of the basin is concerned, as that only cou’d c n me under the heading of harbuui construction, but I find that, aftei the Easin had been partially dredged out — it silted up again, and consequently had to be re-dredged. Now, sir, I jubmft that the matter of re-dredging the basin should rightly have been pard for out of revenue, as I cannot find any authority for maintenance work being paid for out of loan moneys. This matter of dredging will be, and must be, a very expensive matter for all time, to maintain the necessary depth for ships to work our port, and, therefore, has to be faced. It is not singular to Wanganui, but obtains more or less to all river ports in the ,world. Now, sir, if these are facts, and I maintain they are, the first concern of the Harbour Board should bo to get an efficient dredge plant, and I was under the impression that that was being done. Instead of that, I find that they have paid £30,000 for a tug boat, which will bo non-revenue earning, and will considerably increase the excess of expenditure over revenue. In the report, Mr Higginbottom emphasises the fact, that the expenditure over revenue is approximately £lCyO per annum and, although he anticipates that the reevnue might overtake the expenditure in a couple of years, it is quite easy to conceive that his estimate . might te wrong, and that the rcveise J might be the case, namely, that the expcndituie will increase in proportion lo the revenue received, because the matter of dredging or re-dredging must be, in the nature of things, a permanent charge against the maintenance account. As the time will arrive when there will be no more loan money available for this work, what is going to happen to the port? It is all very well for the chairman of the Board to broadcast statements as to the depth of water and faciTittes pertaining at Wanganui for handling oversea ships, but I find that after the Board spending approximately £609,» in harbour improvements, the draugnt of the rhips entering the port is no greater than it was prior to 1916. 1 have a recollection of discharging a ship (long before 1916) at Castlecliff Wharf, called tho s.s. “Brisbane,’’ which was drawing 18ft. 6in. or mote. 11 submit, sir, that since then there have been only three or four occasions when ships drawing as much have been berth ed at Castlecliff Wharf. Nir Bignell is very apt to blame overseas shipping companies for not allowing their ships to enter the port, but after perusing the above statements, which are correct, it is obvious that it is not over seas companies which are to be blamed for this state of affairs, but only tne present Harbour Board. Tho above rs of vital importance to the whole of de people in W’anganui, not merely one section of them. Therefore, I icol it my duty to ventilate these matters. T. H. LOVEGKOVB Mai ch 12, 1927.