ACCESS TO THE SEA

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22073, 22 April 1937, Page 4

ACCESS TO THE SEA

/TO THE EDITOR OF THE PRESS. Sir,—l am sorry to find the president of the Chamber of Commerce indulging in over-statement to support his case for the tunnel road. For example, he says the cost of the tunnel would be a gift .from the Government Where does the Government find money for gifts of this sort? If the president does not know, the members of his council can enlighten him. Ho should be the last man to encourage the notorious over-spending policy of the Government by disseminating fairy stories of this sort. Then again he has been struck with the lack ot harbour facilities at Lyttelton in comparison with other places. I probably go to Lyttelton as often as he does, but have not formed the same impression. A few years ago the Chamber of Commerce inquired into this very point and sent a searching questionnaire to the principal exporters and importers. An examination of the replies proved definitely that the story of inconvenience to the trading community resulting from poor harbour facilities was a gross exaggeration. And again, he attaches importance to the fact that in Auckland there are twice as many factory employeesas there are in Christchurch. There are many obvious reasons for this, and not least among them, the fact that the population of Auckland is twice that of Christchurch. I agree that it would be very nice, though not I think particularly profitable, to be able to drive through to Lyttelton on a level road to shipside ; but this would also require extensive alterations to the wharves, which it is understood would cost much more than the £500,000 estimated to be cost of the tunnel road. J. venture to say that without very expensive alterations to the wharves the tunnel road would become a white elephant very soon after the novelty had worn off. and might easily come to be known throughout New Zealand as the Christchurch Folly.—Yours, etc.. T. April 21. 1937.