"A WASTE OF FERN"

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 17, 19 July 1929, Page 8

"A WASTE OF FERN"

People who are sympathetic towards the development of pumice lands—and who have not a penny of pecuniary interest in such development—will, we think, be dissatisfied with the tone of the Hon. G. W. Forbes's speech in the House of Representatives last night. It may be literally true that the tract of land to be opened up by the railway is "largely a waste of fern scrub and three," but the public has been encouraged to believe by State and other experts, ever since the inquiry of 1911, that this waste can be economically reclaimed. Mr. Forbes is evidently not prepared to say '"No to the experts, and as he betrays so little exact knowledge about the problem of the ultimate useful- [ ness of pumice lands, the tone of his j remarks as conveyed in the quoted words docs not seem lo be either justifiable or helpful. If the country had a Minister of Lands who would definitely pronounce the pumice belt as useless within this generation, and who would give reasons, it could respect him for the strength of his convictions. If, on the other hand, being lacking in the essential knowledge, he would do his best to collate it. or appoint a competent nonpolitical committee to collect it, then the consideration of the subject might be effectively advanced. But his remarks on pumice point in neither direction, and rather tend to obscure the issue. In another part of his speech, dealing with undeveloped lands in other parts of the country, and with deteriorated lands, he is reported as admitting the need of fertiliser, and therefore of "good metalled roads." The case for pumice development also turns largely on fertiliser. What, then, does the Minister think of the transport problem as presented in the millions of acres round Taupo?

Searching his remarks for the answer to that question, we find him saying that it is "entirely premature" to urge that the Rotorua-Taupo railway "be put through before the possibilities of the land had been tested." Does he, then, consider that the pioneering work in pumice should be abandoned, or that it can be properly carried on with such roading transport as exists or is proposed? Note must be taken, in this connection, of the remark made last night by the ex-Minister of Public Works, Mr. K. S. Williams, that "to build a road in the district would be almost as expensive, if not as expensive, as building a railway." In this part of New Zealand the question of pumice development (and the needed transport) is viewed from no provincial angle whatever. The only consideration is the national importance of developing a waste asset,- and it cannot be brushed aside in the light manner indicated in the speech of the Minister of Lands. The stoppage of the deviation at Palmerston North touched Wellington much more nearly, and caused here no dissent whatever, because the Government analysed the whole position and published its reasons. We have seen nothing equivalent on the subject of the Taupo area. If the Government has a case as strong as it had at Palmerston North, its publication would certainly be welcomed, and it would receive an unprejudiced hearing. The railway may be unjustified; if so, what is the alternative? Taking the worst view of the pumice plains, we find it hard to believe that their potential productivity can be less than that of the Buller Gorge as it existed before the regrettable earthquake.