Tunnel Road

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 29016, 3 October 1959, Page 3

Tunnel Road

Sir, —“Common Sense” justifies his pen-name in his conclusion that the National Roads Board should take over the tunnel road, but can anyone tell us how to “cancel the Tunnel Road Authority?” This autocratic authority has not tried to get the shortest and cheapest tunnel. The one the authority wants is the longest and most expensive of all those suggested for consideration, and is now estimated to cost about a million pounds more than at first expected. The authority’s proposals would provide a rich man’s road, costing more to use than the railway, and much more than the existing road. Moreover, the tolls would not pay anything near total interest and operating cost. We pay petrol tax and roads tax in any case. With these funds, the National, Roads .Board could provide a good road with a shorter tunnel, and no tolls.—Yours, etc., October 2, 1959. ARTHUR LUSH.

Sir, —The refusal to allow the Tunnel Authority to raise the loan is staggering and bewildering After 40 years of planning by competent engineers all was ready for formal sanction by the Loans Board, which knew what was coming and could have completed formalities in a few days. The Government has deliberately staved off the tunnel road, the Cook Strait cable, Franz Josef hotel, Dunedin harbour loan, Nelson railway, and other projects. Shakespeare observed many years ago that “when all these cogidies do so conjointly meet they are portentous things unto the clime they do point upon.” In this case, hoarding for an election hand-out. Five routes surveyed for the Nelson railway to catch all electors. By election day there will be more theodolites than telephone poles at showy situations—Yours, etc., E. K. BANFIELD. September 30, 1959.

Sir, —The reason given by the Loans Board for deferring the loan until the port improvement project and the tunnel line up seems like the sound verdict of a group of experienced men. Except for a lot of noise, I have not, as yet, heard one sound reason against the board’s decision. I am getting near the retiring age, and thought that I lived in a freehold home, but now find that I have to pay rent for my home, in the form of rates, largely made up of interest on loans. I would like to see the tunnel, but, frankly, rates are becoming a burden. I would like to see your journal give the man in the street some idea of just what the tunnel is going to cost him, especially if the loan is granted prematurely—Yours, etc., RATEPAYER. October 2, 1959.