The Tunnel.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18634, 8 March 1926, Page 8

The Tunnel.

It was a rather odd reason that was given for the exclusion of the newspapers from the conference on the Lyttelton tunnel which was held on Saturday: that the public might he misled if newspapers attempted to report the proceedings without haying be-

I fore them the full reports of Merz and McLellan and of the chief officials of the Railways and Pnblic Works Departments. If the newspapers would have been in a difficulty, the representai lives of local bodies must have been even less well situated to express an opinion on the matters placed before them. The Prime Minister has undertaken, however, to circulate the reports as soon as possible, and they can then be examined at leisure. In the meantime we are given to understand that the conference came to the conclusion that the electrification of the tunnel, as proposed by the Government, will be better than duplication if the choice is between the two methods of improving the communication between the City and the port. Although it has been represented often enough that Canterbury is of one mind as to what is required, this is not correct. Apart from the fact that some people believe that the real need of Canterbury is, not better' arrangements at Lyttelton and between Lyttelton and the City, but the creation of a new port entirely unconnected with Lyttelton, there are many people who hold that much more necessary than any improvement of the existing railway connexion is the provision of a practicable road from the City to the port. Upon one point, however, everyone is agreed, namely, that steam haulage through f he tunnel should be done away with. All who have passed through the tunnel in recent years have felt that it is disgraceful that the journey from Lyttelton to Christchtach should include a mile of filthy tunnel. Until fuller particulars are available, one cannot say whether the electrification plans will bring anything more than the comfort and cleanliness —and, in a degree, the safety—which have been wanting. Something more is, of course, needed — faster handling of traffic -and a more frequent service, not to mention better facilities for loading, unloading, and distribution at each end. These advantages must be got in some way, and Canterbury cannot accept the mere electrification of the section as a satisfaction of its needs. Indeed, we can justly regard the electrification as nothing more than the Railway Department ought to do as a matter of course —as the mere application of modern methods; not as the provision of a new boon for Canterbury, but as the belated removal of an extraordinary and special disadvantage.