"CONSIDER COSTS."

Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 258, 31 October 1929, Page 11

"CONSIDER COSTS."

DEVELOPMENT LINES.

MR. COATES' ADVICE

RELATION TO WORKING RAILWAYS.

(By Telegrnph.—Parliamentary Reporter.)

WELLINGTON, Wednesday,

Reiterating the point which he made when discussing the Railway Statement, that developmental lines must be considered very carefully in relation to the costs of operating railways, the Leader of the Opposition, the Right Hon. J. G. Coates, stated during the debate on the Public Works Statement in the House of Representatives yesterday that he did not approach the matter in any party spirit. Ho regarded it frdin the point of view of public concern. Mr. Coates said the Public Works Statement revealed that expenditure on railways construction was to be increased this year by approximately £600,000. There'was a time when £SOO,OOO a year was regarded as fairly heavy annual expenditure, but to - Jay we had reached the sum of approximately £1,600,000. It was time to ask, "Is this acceleration in the best interests of the country?" The management of railways should be more divorced from political control than it was at present, continued- Mr. Coates. Mr. F. Langstone (Waimaririo): Did you feel the effect of political influence when you were Minister of Railways? Mr. Coates: It was always a problem as to just how and when we should commercialise our railways. Losses Should be Known. No one had ever been given the job of managing the railways, continued Mr. Coates. The system of management by a directorate was possibly the most democratic and sound, while it preserved all that was good in State railways, and also gave the advantage of commercial control. 'There were those who said that he was opposed to the completion of the South Island Main Trunk Ijne, but such was not the case. What he asked was that an indication should be given concerning tho actual losses likely to be incurred. He believed that the people of New Zealand were of a practical mine!, and all that they asked was whether this line would pay its way when completed. . There was the developmental issue to be considered, said Mr. Coates, and it was riot reasonable to expect operating railways to carry the cost of development lines.. To Expect them to do that was to ask them to carry an impossible'load.' It was quite another thing to pay the operating railways for losses incurred on development lines. It might be that development lines would ultimately lead to increased railway traffic. That had to be tried out. The present acceleration of railway construction made the problem of development lines more acute. Could there 'be any valid objection to a fair survey of the propositions under consideration? No one could possibly object. It was possible that the railways would be put back £500,000 a year for all time on two or three projects at present contemplated. Hence the necessity for a fairly close examination. "I say there is no need to stop any line," continued Mr. Coates, "because there is time and plenty to examine carefully our railways construction iprograimne." Mr. J. .McCombs (Lytt'elton): How many times do you want them examined? "Loss of £250,000 per Annum." Mr. Coates: What line has been examined? . Mr. McCombs: The South Island Main Trunk. Mr. Coates: No, pardon me, the evidence shows a loss of £250,000 per annum. Mr. McCombs: Oh, so it has been examined, -then? The Hon. G. W. Forbes: The Progress League makes it that loss. Mr. Coates said there should be a thorough examination of all lines. The Labour Leader (Mr. H. E. Holland): You did not take that attitude when you were Minister of Railways. Mr. 'Coates: The lion, gentleman is always puzzled, aucLno doubt he will be more puzzled still "before long. Mr. Holland: You are a Chinese puzzle] (Laughter.) Mr. Coates concluded this portion of his speech by making an urgent appeal for an examination of the projected lines, so that information might be given regarding the likely losses on developmental lines. Minister Against Commercialisation. ' The Minister of Public Works, the Hon.;E.,A. Ransom, replying early this morning, said if the Leader of the Opposition- considered that non-political control of the railways would be an imhe had had ample opportunity of putting that policy into action, but he had not done so. Personally, Mr. Ransom considered it would not be in the interests of New Zealand that the railways should be commercialised so Vs to run at profit and pay full in' terest on capital expenditure. Hs regarded the railways rather as means of developing a young country. The railways " had done more to develop New Zealand than any other enterprise. The Minister of. Justice, the Hon. T. M. Wilford: You mean that the railways should be the servants and not the masters of the people? Mr. Ransom: Exactly, and the value of the railways must lie in long-distance lines. He added that it was the policy of the Government that small sections of the line should be linked up. Mr. Wilford: Would it mean that farmers would have to" pay full rates for their fertilisers if the railways were commercialised? • Mr.' Ransom: It would mean many disadvantages. ■ The Minister added that railways were most useful in shifting stock. He had been approached on several occasions by local bodies with requests that special stock roads be provided. Rather than go in for any system of dual roading, . it -would be preferable -to link up unfinished lines. ■ Age'n.cy in Development. Speaking of the South Island Main Trunk line,. Mr. Ransom said the developmental aspect had to be kept in mind. He considered that the prospects of New Zealand were as bright as they ever were in the past, and where the country was able to meet the demand for developmental lines, that demand should be met. He did not believe that any loss which might accrue—and he did, not. regard it l'cally as a loss—would be as great as the losses of ' the past. Traffic was increasing all the time, and it appeared that losses would tend to decrease. *