GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 11693, 21 September 1903, Page 3

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

{TRESS ASSOCIATION' TELEGRAM.) house of representatives Saturday, September 19. THE RAILWAYS ESTIMATES. After the Telegraph Office closed Mr ELL S motion to report progress on the Estimates was lost by 26 votes to 19. The Committee then entered on consideration of the Estimates for tho working of the Railways Department. Sir WM. RUSSELL said it, was an outrage to vote such a large sum of money at that hour of the morning, in view of tho difference of opinion that existed ns to tho amounts that should bo charged to revenue and what to capital. Sir J. G. WARD contended that, if the theories put forward by those opposed to the present system were put into practice, it would crush the life blood out of the users of the railways. Mr MASSEY voiced several complaints about railway management in his district. Mr JAS. ALLEN quoted from the New South Wales Railway report, of 1901 to show that relaying, re-ballastingami re-spac-ing had all been charged to maintenance, and that many works which, according to that report, might fairly have been charged to capital had been charged to maintenance, including the renewal of a viaduct in steel at a cost of £45,0C0. Did they, he, asked, do that in New Zealand? Sir J. G. WARD—"Yes; wo do.” Mr ALLEN—"No, you don't. You charge the difference between the cost ot tho original structure and the cost of the renewal.”

Sir J. G. WARD—“Wo made nno a few days ago, and charged it to maintenance.” Sir WM. RUSSELL—“That only shows that he has taken our advice.” Mr ALLEN went on to say that in Victoria they not only charged more to working expenses than wo did, but the interest on productive capital on uncompleted lines was debited to the Railway Department, and included in the accounts. Did Sir Joseph Ward do that? Sir J. G, WARD—“Not until wo have taken them over.” Mr ALLEN said the Department had last year begun to improve in this respect. The result was, no doubt, due to the severe criticism which had been levelled against tho system in vogue. Tn the. course, of further discussion. Sir WM. RUSSELL said ho had looked very carefully into the matter, and it was borno very heavily upon bis mind that tho whole system of the railway accounts in tho Australasian colonies was radically wrong, and when hard times came, and wo could no longer borrow to pay dividends out of capital, the words they had been uttering in tho House in the last few years would be remembered, and they would be obliged to manage out of revenue. Sir J. G. WARD quoted figures to show that for years past the replacing of wornout engines had been paid out of capital. He would never subscribe to the doctrine that the cost of a railway carriage, which was to last thirty years or so, was to bo taken out of the pockets of the people by putting murderous rates upon them. The new rolling stock was debited to capital, and bo also pointed to the fact that in 1899 the railways report bad laid down tho policy, which was endorsed by tho House, tiiaf. £2,500,000 should be spent during five years in railway development. At 3.50 a.m. a motion by Mr MASSEY to report progress was lost bv 29 votes to 16. A similar motion by Mr VILE at 5.5 a.m. was lost by 29 votes to 13. Sir WM. RUSSELL entered a strong protest against the action of the Government in forcing through at that hour Estimates involving £1,301.000. It was discreditable to representative institutions to havo forced upon the House a line of conduct unbecoming to sensible business men. Mr MASSEY expressed tho hope that, in the near future some, arrangement would ba come to by which the fullest opportunity would be available for .a proper discussion of the Estimate of these great State departments. Take, for instance, the Railway Department. When the annual railway statement came down, the Standing Orders should permit its lining debated on the same lines as the Financial Statement. Eventually at 7 a.m. the. whole vote was agreed to unaltered. Mr SEDDON then moved to report progress and this was. carried by 30 votes to 13On a. motion for adjournment. Mr MASSEY' said the reason for the. prolonged discussion was a breach of faith on the part of Mr Seddon, who_had promised not to sit late. It was the most deliberate breach of faith he had ever witnessed. Mr SEDDON said all he had promised was that he would sir. for a reasonable time. The House rose, at 7.40 a.m.