RAILWAYS BILL.

Press, Volume LXVII, Issue 20215, 18 April 1931, Page 15

RAILWAYS BILL.

MOTION FOR REJECTION DEFEATED. ■ , ' >: / . .v ; i A LARGER DIRECTORATE, DEBATE IN COMMITTEE. STAGE. . ■ (PKJMS ASSOCIATION TELB3&AM ) s WELLINGTON, April 17. < In the House of Representatives this afternoon, on the motion of the Prime Minister, urgency was accorded the passage of the Government .Railways Amendment Bill. The debate on the second readme was concluded, and a division taken on Mr 0. A. Wilkinson's amendment: "Thai the Bill be read this day six months hence," which resulted in its defeat by" 40 votes to 22. The division list was as under: For the Amendment (22).. Armstrong ■ Lysnar Black McKeen Carr - , Martin • Chapman Munro * i Fletcher W. Nash Eraser . v O'Brien " Hogan Parry ! H.iE. Holland Rushworth Howard 1 Savage" Jordan / Sullivan Langstone Wilkinson Against the Amendment (49). Ansell McDonald Atmore McDougall . Bitchener r -Macmillaa Bodkin Macpherson . Broadfoot Makitanara Burnett, .» Maßsey - Clinkard •- Munns Coates Murdoch Cobbo , .r. A. Nash ; de la Perielle Ngata Dickie Polso,n -Donald Ransom'- -» Endean Smith Field;.- ... ; Stall worthy "'<• • ' Forbes Stewart .Hamilton Sykes ■ '5, Harris Taverner. Hcaly ' Te Tomo •' Henare Veitch H. Holland Waite Jones Ward - ' Jull ' Williams Kyle 'Wright V'! Linklater , Young. . . Lje ' J--'*' The Bill Was then .read a. second oul a division, .those who for the amendment voting against; -second reading,; and vice* versa/ Amendments to the Bill "were intro-, duced by Governor-General's Message? " - The Rt. Hon. Ji G. Coates, Leader of the Opposition asked if -the, ,Prim,e i Minister would explain what ttfey amounted to. •Mr D. G. Sullivan (Lab., -Avon"): iFqst what' you asked tou > ■ - ' Mr Armstrong; They yoyr • own amendments!. . iV, - '' - i Mr Forbes said the -main Amendments dealt with 'alterations in the- constitution of the Board, and would being' it jiJiore into the position of, a. There were a number- ofjothef airasd- . me'hts" "but they were meray" conseciuen--tial. Mr Eraser said< the 'present trW time to explain the.. am<md;nenip, .If the Prime Minister did not kftW enoiiffh about them to nmfrn an PYntntfo.

vnvi«s" AUVUII liU«l» tU JIH&P fell tionj perhaps the Leader of the 'Opposition would do ij for Mm. .(Lafrtfur'laugS: ter<V ■ The - Bill was b'&d enougfc, airily; arid to -waited 'io Tcnow 'jffflie 'anjeijd". thenw'made it Worse before he voted' tot it. 1 ' ' »■ v ''J Amendments Outlined. < "VVTren the',House' vent _iivfco tee on, the -Bill, Mr Forbes, explaining ,the.amendments, said he thought would, inaTco the bill satisfactory. ' ■ "The* Leader jof the Labour. Party: ' the Prime Minister* toll the .Gbpi? mittee who "suggested five the Board! Mr.C. Hv,dinkard suggested six, * 1 Labour-members: That accounts foe it. .> . , , Mr Forbes: The suggestion .Cftpe from*?several quarters. A? new subclause tad been added to Clattserl- mak-. ing the Bill come into' fojrpe « on- Jjum Ist. The Board had been altered ,tb,» directorate, all of irliom would be paittime employees. The object «f that was, , to get the. services 'of -the best mcit -available, and .still leave q tp> engage in their own business. two , appointed, other than the; chairmap, would - remain on free twd -,ytiara,.and. ; the' nett two for/tprM .years. All' subsequent > appointments would bo for. two years. The chairman, would paid 'iflOOO per year, and' tfe? other members £SOO. The eott'of memberd' salaries would' still total '£3ooo/ It had originally been' proposed to ' have a chairman at £ISOO, and two other members at £750 each. - The House adjourned at >5.30 p.ni \ Labour Opinions. x Mr E. J. Howard (Lab., ChristckurchSouth) said he did-not propose-to do v anything to delay- the passage of tbp" Bill, because ho jegarded the division on the | second reading os> a fair ,indieAtibn pf the feeling of the second' reading had been carried by 49' votes to- 2)2, and those 49 would have to b'ear the brunt of the" for "the consequences of the Bill. . It seemed. .outside interests llad decided' that the country must pass through ? ft -phase which he predicted would -be -air one*a? a'result ofithe adoption of" suck measures a? that at pre- > sent before the House. The majority in' favour of the Bill rendered it "IW-. less to pirgue against it,, and further prolong the present session, which he,i for one, was anxious to < bring to a close. . Mr; P. Fraser (L;»b., Wellington Central) said the extraordinary feature of the Bill' had'been that it had been advocated, by .nobody. It had been condemned by many members and had been apologised for' an'd defended by T <h9 Government-,, but no ono had come forward to advocate tho Bill and demonstrate what benefits'it might produce. He criticised the proposal to'place control in the hands of men who badnof 1 had experience in railway matters. 1 Business Policy. Mr Coates said the Board of Directors would- be 1 responsible .for d6dgft» ing the business, policy of the' Railways/ and seeing that the management carried* out that policy. A majority in tfca House were of, the opinion tjiat- NctwZealand uhouTd; endeavour to follow-th#T? principle that bad been'adopted sue-' eessfully in other countries, by allp«t<> ing the railways to be controlled by & Board.,, That Board; Mr MWted, should nearly as possible conform with the principles of a Board W Directors of an ordinary company. The. next question was - just how 4fce' -Hb&ae' was going to set jip a directorate.* 4&exe' had - been complaints' that 1 pressure; brought'to. bear froip electorates. «nd> | other quartet had prevented too rail, ways f being rtfn on business lUfc? The- ia|eatioife\pt fcglwpf,

controL^ 86 l ° eUn,iß ? te jwfitieal I«boiw members; Does it do that* Mr Goates said the BUI eßaunatod political control except in one particular, namely, in that the Treasury m virtually in th<j position, of- areeeiv*r. ft was hopeless, to pat the system an trial on the understanding that there should be a year to yea? Budget. The Treasury at some point, must cone rate the situation, but under the Bin th« Treasury was in the position o£ a re- " ceivership. That difficulty, however, might be overcome if a strong Boarit were appointed. It would be for, a strong Board to give a lead to the Treasury in regard to'the system of accounting it desired to be followed. Mr Coates said the Board mnai ascertain from the management the position of the railways. Up to that point, it must depend upon their management, but from the information that ' was placed at the disposal of the directorate it would undoubtedly mould its polk*. Up to the present they *had had changes of Government with consequent changes of policy. ' Under the Board continuity of policy would be possible. Report* should be presented to Parliament annually on the" same lines as the report previously supplied by the Minister. Existing Concessions. Mr Coates said he tranied"'to ask the Prime Minister how he proposed to treat the present concessions that were given to school children and - were granted in connexion with freights/m fertilisers and so- forth. We're tlie present concessions to continue? Mr C. A. Wilkinson (Ind., iigmont t; The Board will determine those points. Mr Coates: Oh, no. It trill be a matter for the Government to deeide whether it will make "up for the lease* consequent upon continuing these services. I want an assurance that ndcr this Bill these eonceasiojw will be without reference to Pazlia'ment.. Mr Forbes said, in bis opinion, the Bill would vastly improve the railways in this country. He considered the texport of the recent i. had been composed of hiniinwwmi had been the most valuable 'report made in connexion with the New Zealand^Bailways, and he was.so pTeasedVwpttti'it that he was convine&T control be handed over to hnjhiMHnw with a view to their determining a commercial poliey. " " . Replying to Mr Coates in- xefneaeeto existing railway concessions, Mr, -Forbes stud those concessions would be a matter for adjustment between the Government and"the directors. JTha ■ thing: the directors would 1 dQ r^m|ji , be submit to the Gayernment .that 'tbe . earnmw^s. J expect the Government to "make, vb fiar In ernmeitpoliey quae I time, railway policy. That was attitude that -could Tin r"qirrt'nd b Wuld-be [, able contribution to raec&srol isihinjr I- management is this . cowbT.; 'Sim r, wotUtftj be aubstantiid_*bapu3At K fas snlt.'Af. the association^^ - with-railway minds in controffins'the i Bin would tli»' I railways -as independent "*3 poojltle from political interference,' r j The. Reader of the Labour -Party, ; ilr H. E. .swd- the" forther. ||h» debate went m«r»t. deUg^tftil*3 took up the attitude saihijfm were being dissociated" from fotimil interference, why' did he not bring dfcgaik .A BiU tOdftbQliah politiieal dontxolt

say wa» that of thj Motue^f' io provide" 1 | construction 1 , t -