Loan To S.P.A.N.Z. Again Debated

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30200, 3 August 1963, Page 12

Loan To S.P.A.N.Z. Again Debated

(Special Crspdt N.Z.P.A.) WELLINGTON, August 2. Government assistance to South Pacific Airlines of New Zealand provided the main topic in discussion in Parliament today when the Legislative Department estimates were debated. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Nordmeyer) said that if the Government intended to provide financial assistance to a private airline, the details of that aid should be known to the House. The Minister of Civil Aviation (Mr McAlpine) spoke in the debate after being asked to do so by several Opposition members. Calling on Mr McAlpine to speak, Mr Nordmeyer said: "If the Minister does not do so, I feel I should move that the vote be reduced. I will not so move at present There is still time" . There was a pause, after which the Chairman of ’Committees (Mr R. E. Jack).

put the question that the sum in the estimates be agreed to Immediately, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (M Watt) rose. But before he could speak. Mr McAlpine received the call. “The plain fact is that S.P.A.N.Z came to the House for money to tide it over until the money derived from an Australian tourist programme, promoted by Ansett Industries, began to flow.” said Mr McAlpine “Originally, this amount was stated to be £15.000.” He said it was not all drawn at once. In reply to Opposition Interjections. Mr McAlpine said: "There is no item on the Estimates this year to lend this airline anything." Mr McAlpine said SP.A.N Z and its Australian associates undertook to spend £20.000 in Australia to advertise the so-called “Maori-go-round“ tour of New Zealand, in conjunction with T.E.A.L. For some time the anticipated traffic did not eventuate, and the sun» borrowed grew to £21.305 Now there were a number of applications, and the trade was beginning to move. He said much of the money lent was not Government money. It belonged to local bodies, and would be collected In airport d-es. Referring to the NelsonChristchurch service, Mr McAlpine said that before

making a decision last year, he had been in touch with the Mayor of Nelson, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Progress League. All wanted to keep S.P.A.N.Z. tn operation. He had then suggested that N.A.C. should withdraw from the service for 12 months. “N.A.C. will be back tn operation on this route as soon as the 12 months are up," Mr McAlpine said “Schedules have been worked out by co-operation between the companies.” He said N.A.C. did not want to take over the operation of S.P.A.N.Z., if it was unable to carry on. But if it went out of existence some small centres would lose their air connexion “There is not room enough for two trunk airlines in New Zealand.” Mr McAlpine said “Indeed, there is barely enough room in Australia But there is a role here for a subsidiary airline like SPA.N.Z” Mr J. Mathison (Opposition, Avon) said Mr McAlpine could have saved much time if be had spoken earlier. He had almost had to be persuaded to speak. He asked if the Government intended to let local bodies wait for their share of the airport dues S P.A.N.Z owed

The Government bad not stated its p 'icy on private airlines. Labour did not oppose private airlines unless

they competed unfairly with N A C. At this point Mr G. Grieve (Government. A warua > moved the motion be put. but the chairman said that although much of the debate seemed irrelevant, the subject had not been under discussion long enough

The Prime Minister <Mr Holyoake) said that surely no-one would say the Government should have denied SP.A.N Z the extra £5OOO and thus broken its agreement Overspending an estimate was not unusual. If N.A.C was instructed to give the services given by S P.A.N Z. it would have to be of a different standard, but people wanted the service even without the frills The Opposition could move if it wished that S PA.NZ should not go into any airport without paying dues: but the people of Nelson had overwhelmingly wanted S P.A.N Z-, so the action was taken by the Minister. “We say it would be better for the Government to give assistance directly and show it in the Estimates. That is the difference." said Mr Watt It could be a subsidy to the airline.

Mr Holyoake said the Government was not subsidising the airline, which was running at a loss. It was a subsidy to the people of isolated areas where there would be a very heavy loss if N.A.C. was instructed to operate.