RABBIT BOARD RATES

Waikato Times, Volume 125, Issue 20917, 23 September 1939, Page 10

RABBIT BOARD RATES

TUHIKARAMEA DISPUTE EMPOWERING LEGISLATION OBJECTION BY OPPOSITION (By Telegraph.—Special to Times) WELLINGTON, Friday Strong exception was taken by members of the Opposition in the House of Representatives today to a clause in the Local Legislation Bill validating rates made and levied by the Tuhikaramea Rabbit Board. They held that an important principle was at stake, and that the clause had the effect of overriding a decision of the Supreme Court. Although the Opposition called for a division on the clause, they did not force it to a vote, and the clause was subsequently agreed to on the voices. On September 5, 1938, the Tuhikaramea Rabbit Board made and levied differential rates of 2d and Id based on the acreage of land occupied by ratepayers in its district. Prior to that meeting, however, the hoard had notified its intention, in terms of section 54 of the Rating Act, 1923, to make and levy, at the meeting above referred to, a fiat rate of 2d an acre in respect of land within the rabbit district. The differential rates were, calculated to produce a total amount of £lB4 17s 7d, and of this amount the sum of £lsl 3s lias been paid by ratepayers, leaving a balance outstanding of £33 14s 7d. Supreme Court Action “One of the ratepayers whose rates had not been paid moved in the Supreme Court lor an injunction restraining the hoard from collecting the rates of 2d and Id levied by it, on the grounds that the requirements of section 54 of the Rating Act, 1925, had not been properly complied with,” states an explanatory memorandum. “The injunction was duly granted in the 'Supreme Court at Hamilton, restraining the board from collecting rates within its district. “In effect, this means that the board will he unable to collect the balance of the rates outstanding, nor the corresponding amount of subsidy payable by the ‘Government, and as the finances of tha board for the year have been based on the total amount of rates to be received and the total Government subsidy payable in connection therewith, the Court decision will therefore react unfavourably on the hoard’s finances, and it is already in an embarrassing financial position by reason of that injunction. Collection of Balance “The board accordingly desires that special legislation should he provided for the purpose of validating the rates in question so that it will be able to collect the balance outstanding, which is a comparatively small amount. In addition, the hoard considers it unfair to the rest of the ratepayers who paid their rates prior to the injunction being granted that a small proportion of the ratepayers should be able to resist payment of rates which, although technically it is not entitled to collect, are necessary and vital to the operations of the board. “The clause validates all the actions of the board with respect to the making and levying of the rates in quesUsn, so as to enable it to proceed with the collection of the outstanding balance of the rates lor the present year.”