Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

The Press Thursday, June 3, 1950. Railway Development.

A considerable part of the time of the executive of the Progress League at yesterday's meeting -was occupied by the consideration of appeals for support coming from various organisations of a somewhat similar character. Th© Marlborough Chamber of Commerce asked for help in the campaign for the completion of the South Island Main line. The Okarito Harbour Improvement League desired support for the movement for a safe harbour at Okarito. The Buller Railway League urged the claims of the Buller Railway. We do not intend here to discuss the merits of these claims, further than to say that they are assuredly -worthy of support. The Marlborough people, we may note, will probably be disappointed, and perhaps more than disappointed, that the Progress League cannot do more than promise to assist as soon as the Midland Railway is completed. What we desiro to emphasise just now is the impropriety of permitting the continuance of such a system of public works development as necessitates theso appeals for help that pass from ono local league to another. ,We have''dealt with this grave weakness in national policy dozens and dozens of times, and we must continue to deal with it until reform is an accomplished fact. It should not be necessary for the Marlborough Chamber of Commerce, through its Progress Committee, to appeal to any. other body for aid in agitating for the completion of a railway. It should not be necessary for any district to form a league to fight for tho construction of any public work. But as matters stand, no district that -stands in need of a railway can hope to havo its needs attended to unless it does fight. The existence of all these leagues is iu itself a strong condemnation of the policy inherited by tho present Government from tho Liberal administration. Tho problem of national development is not so complex that it cannot be tackled with full confidence that a general plan, to cover a period of ten years, can be worked but; and it is certainly the duty of tho Government to deal with the problem to that end. Whether this or that railway should be built or completed should depend upon whether its construction will provide a firstrate investment of tho public's money, and no investment of this kind can be called first-rate if it prevents tho investment of money in a still more profitable work. It is ahsurd and harmful that this should not bo the test for public undertakings. Tho urgent and necessary work, which will greatly stimulate production and national prosperity, has to be delayed, under tho present system, because there are noisy and vigorous communities in other districts to bo pacified

One unfortunate result of tie formation cf all these leagues is that the position remains almost exactly as it was. Their activities cancel each other. Indeed, we are sometimes inclined to think that they ivre strengthening the present had system of public works derelopment, for the Auckland League is furnishing the Government ■with arguments to use against the Canterbury League, and vice versa. There is no way of escape except the removal cf developmental policy from the hands of the politicians. It is years since "The Press" first began to advocate this reform, which, of course, was as little as possible to the taste of the Liberal Governments, members of which, openly gloried in the political use they pould make of the system for party purposes. Within the last few years, however, our proposal has secured pretty general support. The newspapers generally agree-with our views; even tie Liberal newspapersj relieved o£ the necessitv for

1 bolstering up tho old system, are on the side of righteousness. But for gome reason or other the Canterbury Proj gross League is unwilling to make this j cause its oirn. Some of its members do ' indeed realise that- a definite policy in I the matter is desirablcj but the League, j as a League, stands for the present system in that it does not come out strenuously in favour of reform. Its agitation for the completion of the Midland Railway would have far more effect i/ it were coupled with. an agitation for a general surrey of the country's developmental needs and the carrying out of a : proper plan of development under the control of a body which -will he free from political anxieties. j

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19200603.2.18

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume LVI, Issue 16851, 3 June 1920, Page 6

Word Count
738

The Press Thursday, June 3, 1950. Railway Development. Press, Volume LVI, Issue 16851, 3 June 1920, Page 6

The Press Thursday, June 3, 1950. Railway Development. Press, Volume LVI, Issue 16851, 3 June 1920, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert