Mr Jull's Statement

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Volume 59, Issue 35, 13 March 1930, Page 6

Mr Jull's Statement

DESCRIBED AS 'RECKLESS' # 'Entirely Without Prudent Consideration" LOANS BOAHD ADVISED. Describing some of Mr A. E. Jull's statements to the Local Government Loans Board in support of tlie Harbour Board's application for a Ioan for £47,000 for inner harbour work as "a recMess and general estiinate made entirely without the careful smd prudent' investigation and consideration due to such an important and costly undertaking" Messrs P. Higgins and J. C. Bryant bave written to the Local Government Loans Board a joint letter, which was read at the Harbour Board meeting yesterday. It stated: — "Mr Jnll in. his statement to you dated 4th February, and having regard to the Ioan proposals of the Napier Harbour Board, has injtroduced fresh inatter which we think calls for some comment. "We have to reiterate that the bill promoted in 1926 did include provisionk for the leclaination of the areas now projjosed and that, harbour dredging was intended then as now. "Whilst quay extension was not -provided for in the 192G bill, quay extension was part and.parcel of the dredging, reelamation aiid inner harbour • improvenient seheme, and for which was- availahle some £124,000 of. unexpended inner harbour Ioan. ' about the ngatoro. "Tlie official report of the ground5ng of the Ngatoro sliowed that slie kept too much to windward in a westerly gale and consequently got out of the navigating channel. To-day accommodation exists for vessels over 275 feet in length at the Breakwater, where they ave not subjected to the tidal delays of the inner harbour, and where the haulage plant, rolling stock and permanent staff would be more constantly emjiloyed if these vcssels used the Breakwater. j "In our letter to you of January 17 | wo have referred oniv to vessels drawing up to 25 feet and to-day use the Breakwater. It has been Mr Jull him- - self who informed the public that his present dredging proposals and certain West Quay extension at a modest cost would cater for all the vessels now -using the Breakwater and half the "vessels now worked .in the roadstead. Mr Jull does not include in his latest scheme any dredging of the sliallow waters of Messrs Culleh and Keele's entrance channel situated half a mile and over from the pier heads. We have never seeu onv navigation' expert's opinion of the navigability of Mr Jull's present scheme. "We protest that Mr Jull hardly does us justice when he states that we have always supported the filling of the porids by carting from the hills. However, good work has been done in this, respect as a result of the board's stone ' quarrying operations. no financial 1nformation. "Whilst we have made reference to [the satisfactory stato of the board's hnances,- we must corifess that this should not be taken to refer to the toard's present financial year, five months of which have already elapsed. The members have not as yet during [this financial year had placed before [them either the estimates of the dSirxent year, or any financiixl statement whatsoever of the board's present positjpn, excepting that the monthly statements show that our revenue fe down, and further the board has, committed t itself this year to the purchase of a jdrag excavator costing £6080. "In regard to Mr Jull's figures of ccrresponding expenditure at the Breakwater and inner harbour, as no details have been given we have been [unable to cherk or even follow his method of -stating the positiori in this respect.' " " " ■ "We would' draw to your notice Mr Jull's statement in concluding the letter of February 4. In referring to the proposed reelamation he says, •'and which will ultimately more than repay the whole of . the proposed expenditure.' _ We submit that this statement is typical of the manner in which the chairman of the Napier Harbour Board has approached and entered into inner harbour development. It represents a reckless and general estimate made entirely without the careful and prudent investigation and consideration due to such an important and cdstly undertaking. "Finally, we wish to refer to the sense of responsibility Mr Jull displays when he concludes his letter saying 'Should the Ioan money be insufficient any shortage will be made up out of ordinavy revenue.' " mr j. i. cato's dpsnion. A letter was also read which was written to the board in February, 1924, by Mr Jas. I. Cato, branch manager of the Union Co. Mr Higgins said that he had also forwarded this letter to the Loans Board. This letter, after reviewing at some length the troubles of handling cargo in tlie Breakwater cargo slied as it was in 1924 and urgin& that it should be inereased in size to save expeuse and delay to the ships berthing there, .went on: — "We note from your letter that steps are now being taken to put the Nelson. Quay into such a state of repair that many of the vessels nowadays discharging > at the Breakwater will roe able to discharge at the inner harbour. We presume by this that you are referriilg particularlv to the . Kamo, but we( would point out that the new shed you have just built will not hold anything like the quantity of cargo that the Breakwater shed holds, so that even were we ahle to get the Kamo into the inner hadbour, we Would not be any further ahead. "I would here point out that it would be very seldom that we would Ihe able to use both sheds, that is, the one on either side of the Pot, as no Q doubt Messrs Richardson and Co., would have cargo in one of them. Then again even if it chapced that both sheds were available, it- would . mean a very disjointed delivery. Carters would have to load up part of a consignment at one shed and the balance at another. drawback of the current. "At present one_ of the very ' big 'drawbacks to working the inner harbour is the current, which we understand runs from four to seven knots and this means-. that if a ship arrives at the mouth about 7.30 a.m. and has just missed slack water then she must either go to the Breakwater and discharge part of her cargo, and then enter the inner harbour and thus incur extra dues, delay to the ship and disjointed delivery, and furthermore, after the ship has completed discharge and does not finish on slack water, she is further delayed until the nest slack,

viz., about six hours. So it penalises tjie sbip to the extent of up to about 12 hours. As agninst this, she can go s'traiglit to the Breakwater and commence discharge. As the Kamo's mean loaded draught is 16ft. 8Jiri".,'it is unpossfble for her to come here a loaded ship and enter tlie inner harbour. "We respectfully submit that nearIy all tlie revenue which comes from sliips at the Breakwater is paid by this company. and under these circumstances we think perhaps you should lielp us in the shape of providing shed accommodation for the cargo that is being landed and so give the steamers quick despatehes. From the above you will gather that the matter of extra shed accommodation is of great importance to my company, and we trust you will give the matter further consideration." . u Oii Mr Jull's motion he was\ empowered to make -such' written reply to these letters to the Loans Board as he thought fit. "That is, provided you do not introduce new matter again," remarked Mr Higgins. • Mr Jull acknowledged Mr Higgins' courtesy in placing copies oi the letters before the board.*