STATE SPENDING ON AIRFIELDS

Press, Volume LXXXIX, Issue 27090, 13 July 1953, Page 3

STATE SPENDING ON AIRFIELDS

SHIPOWNERS’ VIEWS

COMMENT ON REQUEST BY PRIVATE AIRLINE (New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, July 12. In a statement issued tonight, the New Zealand Shipowners’ Federation criticises a request by the chairman of Straits Air Freight Express (Mr J. Sawers) to the Government for solid airstrips at the Woodburne and Nelson airfields. The statement says: “It is bad in principle for Government money to be used without reward to create rev-

enue for commercial activities. . . . Mr Sawers says nothing about any contribution bv commercial airlines toward the cost of aerodromes and air facilities already provided by the State throughout New Zealand.

“During the last four years the net expenditure by the State on civil aviation has been as follows:—l949-50, £1,277,318; 1950-51, £1,769,312; 1951-52, £1,750,749: and 1952-53, £1,970,000 (estimated).

“In addition, several millions oi Government money has been expended in the provision of aerodromes,’’ says the statement. “Broadly speaking this ever-increasing expenditure provides an indirect subsidy by the taxpayer to the commercial air services of the Dominion.

“The Minister of Railways in March, 1950, was reported to have stated that the Government pays half the freight on every Jon of cargo, and half the passage money for every passenger transported by air in New Zealand by this indirect subsidy. “The claim has been made that this expenditure is justified in the interests of national defence, for which airfields and other facilities are essential, but harbours and their facilities are equally necessary for national defence, and their costs are paid by the users. Merchant shipping is of vital importance to the nation in time of war.

“The principle that the user should pay, in the opinion of the federation, should apply to the commercial air services to a very much greater extent than that suggested by Mr Sawers, who states rather naively that the operators of aircraft using the fields have never been asked to pay landing fees for freight or passengers,” says the statement.

“The New Zealand Shipowners’ Federation feels justified in asking that, in competition with each other, merchant shipping and commercial airways should pay for the facilities each requires, or if, in the interests of national progress, assistance to one or the other is necessary, it should be by direct subsidy, and the amount year by year be made clear to the public and the taxpayer. “Furthermore,” says the statement, ‘.‘before demanding extra expenditure by the Government, the airways should be prepared to pay for the facilities they already enjoy.”