LIGHT RAILWAYS DELEGATION.

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume XLVIII, Issue 7450, 14 July 1920, Page 4

LIGHT RAILWAYS DELEGATION.

Messrs B. C. Robbins and W. H. Gif Ford, representing the Tauranga Light Railways Committee, waited on the Harbour Board on Wednesday last in regard to the matter of the expenses of sending a delegate from Tauranga to join the deputation from Waikato which is proceeding to Wellington to urge an amendment to the Local Railways Act to provide for the construction of 2ft gauge railways.

Mr Robbins explained that the matter had been brought before the Tauranga Light Railways Committee by a communication from the Hamilton Chamber of Commerce. Unless the Government amended the Act light railways could not be constructed. The Hamilton Chamber of Commerce was organising a deputation to Wellington, to urge an amendment of the Act and hid asked Tauranga to send a delegate. The Committee had decided to ask the County and Borough Councils and the Harbour Beard to jointly bear the cost of sending a delegate from Tauranga. The Chairman (Mr King)— What is the probable cost ? Mr Robbins—-About £l2or £15. Mr Gifford emphasised that the i object of the deputation was to induce the Government to alter its policy in regard to rail vvav gauge from 3ft 6in to 2ft It was felt that the cost of sending a delegate to Wellington should be met by the local bodies. Mr Quarrie asked: Would it not be better to urge the Government io push on the railway to Wgihi ? Mr'Robbins replied that the light railway scheme would not come into conflict with the Government. There was no desire to delay the Trunk line to Waihi. The cost of the light railway would be met by the formation of a rating district. The Chairman thought it would be a fatal mistake if the Tau ranga Light Railway Committee were not represented on the deputation. The question would be considered by the Board, and a reply given. The deputation, after thanking the Board, withdrew. Later in the meeting the Board considered the matter. Mr Green moved — That the Board vote the sum of £4 4s towards the expenses of a dele gate, provided trie County Council and Borough Council contribute a like amount. 1 Mr Lally asked: Could the Board legally vote the money ? Mr Green replied that he thought the money could come out of unauthorised expenditure. • Mr Macmillan seconded the motion. It was obvious, he said, that we wanted railways to the port, and the Government would not build all the lines that were wanted. Light railways could not be built until the Act was amended. Mr Grant suggested that a donation be made, but that the Board should not express an opinion on the gauge questionMr Lally contended that the Board should not make a vote. The cost ought to be met privately. He opposed the motion. Mr Green said donations were promised for the survey. He thought the local bodies should bear the cost of sending a delegate to Wellington. Mr Green's'motion was then put and earned, Mr Lolly dissenting. Messrs J. G. Green, B. C. Robbins, and C. E. Macmillan waited j ias a deputation from the Light Railways Committee, on the County Council on Friday, with a request that the Council would contribute, with the Borough Council and Harbour Board, towards the expenses of sending a delegate from Tauranga to join the combined deputation referred to above. On the motion of Cr Lochhead, seconded by Cr Darragh, the Council decided to vote £4 4s towards the expenses of a delegate.