RAILWAY POLICY

Dominion, Volume 22, Issue 265, 5 August 1929, Page 12

RAILWAY POLICY

Sir, —During the controversy on the above subject so many divergent statements have been made and important . fads brought to light that the “Man in the street,” who is not an expert but just an average citizen dependent upon his common sense for guidance, is asking why all this adverse criticism focussed upon one section of the Government’s policy of completing the last link in their main arterial trunk system'when it has been the policy of every railway company in the world to complete their main arterial lines. Like “Mr. Dick and King Charles’s head.” opponents of the proposal seem unable to get away from the missing Jink “Parnnssus-Wharanui” and base all their arguments as to cost of construction and revenue upon one section instead of an average for the whole completed Auckland-Bluff line. Another very debatable point is that "Rail transport is uneconomic when compared with motor transport,” especially in heavy freight and long distance haulage, which applies entirely to the line in question, Auckland-Bluff; such competition was only practicable because the motor tractor was not paying its full share of the cost and upkeep of the road-bed it used, that burden being carried by the country ratepayers, who could have relieved his burden if he had utilised the railways wherever possible. Again, the average man asks, if it is uneconomic to spend £2,500,000 on the completion of our main arterial line, why has no protest been raised against the proposed expenditure of £2,275,000 on the Auckland and Wellington termini which the completed railway will feed? If Mr. Jones’s conclusions in regard to railway policy are correct, why has he remained, silent as to the Taupo line, the Palmerston North deviation, and the Waiotira-Kirikoponui line, which latter cost £75,000 per mile? No, this sudden desire for a review of the country’s railway policy is either very belated or very hypocritical—-the public can draw their own conclusions. Finally, the whole of the criticism and propaganda have been based on Mr. Jones's figures and hie late high position in the Railway service, but the Prime Minister has proved that in the case of the Palmerston North deviation his estimate was only £410,000 out; in fact, his original figures have been more than doublet!. Is it necessary to stress this point further? —I am, etc., GRIMSDALE ANDERSON. Pelorus. July 29.