TUNNEL ROAD PROJECT

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27367, 4 June 1954, Page 10

TUNNEL ROAD PROJECT

Measures Suggested For Advancement

ISSUE OF BROCHURE ADVOCATED

Three moves for advancing the Lyttelton tunnel road project were endorsed by the executive of "the Canterbury Chamber of Commerce last evening; It agreed:— c That the Tunnel Road Promotion Committee should publish a brochure setting out the history of the project, details of the proposed work and facts in support of commencement of the work without further delay, the brochure to be circulated to members of Parliament, local bodies and transport and business interests. If such a brochure was published, the chamber agreed to give £5O towards the cost. That the Government be asked to allow a deputation to present the case for the tunnel road to Parliament on the floor of the House of Representatives during this year’s session. That the Government be asked to place on the Estimates amounts to enable the cost of the work to be computed by the Ministry of Works.

The decisions were made on the motions of Mr J. Roy Smith, who emphasised that he had no wish to see the functions of the Tunnel Road Promotion Committee usurped; but that they should be supported. “No, no,” said Mr W. S. Mac Gibbon, chairman of the committee, when Mr Smith stated that the tunnel project had been “bogged down.” Financial Responsibility “I am convinced that we will never see the tunnel road in Canterbury until the Canterbury people are prepared to accept some financial responsibility,” said Mr Smith. “We have tried too long to get the tunnel road handed to us on a plate. It is time we realised that if the tunnel road is worth while, and will make for the progress and prosperity of Canterbury, we must be prepared to pay something towards

“I know all the arguments that may very properly be adduced to prove that Canterbury is entitled to the tunnel road without any cost to this province. I admit their cogency, and I bow to their logic, but I still say that these arguments have proved an insurmountable obstacle to the piercing of the tunnel. “I now urge that those who are charged with the responsibility of expediting this project should, without delay, tackle the problem of financial responsibility,” said Mr Smith. “It appears that there are two ways in which this problem could be attacked, and there may be others. “First, the suggestion has already been published that Canterbury should establish a fund of £lOO,OOO and should offer this money to the Government as a contribution, asking the Government to find the balance of the cost, the £lOO,OOO .being a substantial gesture to prove Canterbury’s view that the tunnel road brooks no further delay. “The second suggestion is that a tunnel road authority should be set up with power to raise a loan for Canterbury’s share of the cost of doing the job, and with authority both -to levy rates over a properly determined area, and also to establish a system of tolls, at least for a certain number of years.

“Undertake Project Ourselves” “At one time, it was said that an American contractor was prepared to put through the tunnel road, provided he was allowed to extract tolls in payment,” said Mr Smith. “It seems reasonable that we should consider undertaking this project ourselves. It i- obvious that the central Government will have to bear the major proportion of the cost, because this will be a main highway, and the Government has already undertaken to carry out .the work when certain harbour improvements are carried out. “However, this province is not prepared to wait until certain harbour improvements are carried out before it gets the tunnel road. This .province feels that the work of harbour improvement and the piercing of the tunnel should go ahead at the same time. _ There are many arguments in favour of synchronising this work, but the main one is to prevent wasteful uelay. Neither project would be efficient without the other.

“It is understood that the Public Works Department already has surveys and plans for the road, and it is time that authority was given for cost estimates to be prepared as a preliminary to early action. “Opposition to the tunnel road comes from the country and from groups who fail to see what benefit they will receive, commensurate with: what they will have to pay,” Mr Smith said.

. Without being over-optimistic, I think it can be assumed that the Government will bear the major share of the cost of the tunnel road, but I think it is iust as important to realise that Canterbury must find some money to operate as a self-starter. . Advantages of Road Access “There have been odd occasions when Christchurch businessmen have had a taste of what the situation could be if there was road access to the wharves,” said Mr Smith. “There was an occasion when sugar was delivered to Christchurch merchants at 11 a.m. after the ship had commenced unloading at 8 a.m. “Some people seem to feel that there is likely to be strong opposition to the tunnel road project from the North Island. I believe that Auckland and Wellington businessmen realise that the tunnel road would be an improvement of delivery facilities to their markets or sources of supply. . “I am satisfied that when the position is examined it will be found that the private motorists would be prepared to pay something for using the tunnel,” said Mr Smith, “and that the carrier would be prepared to pay a tunnel road toll, worked out either on an average basis or a tonnage basis. These are details, but the principle of some payment by the user in the early stages is sound and just. “Canterbury has been suffering from transport thrombosis for years, and the time has arrived to establish collateral circulation and allow the life blood of commerce to flow freely through the road system of this country,” Mr Smith concluded. Apart from the suggestion of the brochure, the Tunnel Road Promotion Committee already had in mind all the matters suggested by Mr Smith, said Mr Mac Gibbon. Commenting on the decision of the Lyttelton Harbour Board to delay approval of a scheme for harbour extension, he said he had moved that a decision be delayed because country members who would have voted against it might change their minds, and because he hoped that at the next meeting there would be a better attendance. Speaking as a farmer, Mr L. C. Gardiner said there would be greatly increased production in Canterbury in the next 20 or 25 years. Farmers would not take a kindly view of the wharf facilities being undeveloped while they were improving production. “We have to overcome the inertia of our own inactivity,” said Mr R. C. Neville. “Eighty individuals have to be convinced of the need for the tunnel road. We don’t want the weak excuse that the tunnel road will go ahead when something else happens. That is ‘duck-shoving.’ ” One hundred thousand quinnat salmon eggs in three boxes will be carried from Christchurch to Melbourne today by the Tasman Empire Airways Skymaster. The consignment, the third of its kind in three years, is being sent by the Ashburton Acclimatisation Society to fellow organisations for restocking Victorian lakes. Total weight of the consignment is 2981 b.