MOUNT VICTORIA TUNNEL

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 133, 3 December 1930, Page 10

MOUNT VICTORIA TUNNEL

(To the Editor.) Sir,—As my previous letter has not had any apparent effect on our City Fathers, may I trespass upon your 6pace in a further attempt to enlighten the ratepayers of Wellington concerning the proposed expenditure in the near future. A double line of tramway is to be constructed through the new tunnel, with the necessary overhead equipment, etc. It was officially stated that the cost of the Whitniore street deviation was £7841. As the new deviation is more than three times the length of the Whitmore street deviation, the probable cost of the tunnel will be over £20,000. What will be gained for this expenditure? Not another passenger on the trams, not another penny in the fares. There may be a saving of possibly three or four minutes in the timetable, and for this the ratepayers will pay £2500 a year or more, being cost o£ maintenance, interest on loan, etc. Is it worth it? ' . ■ Every day buses are coming more into favour, but the council proposes to add another £20,000 on to the tramway capital cost, for no adequate return. The trams barely pay their way as it is. With another £2500 of expenses and no extra fares, a subsidy from the rates will be necessary. I suggested that if the council is determined to spend £20,000 of the ratepayers' money, it could be spent to greater advantage on motor buses, as their maintenance is the chief cost, and they do not need elaborate rails or overhead equipment to jjun them. . Their extra speed and comfort would induce passengers to travel to their homes at Miramar, Seatoun, or Lyall Bay in 20 to. 25 minutes, as against the 40 minutes taken by the trams. A special fare of 4d could be charged for bus fare, and this would make the service pay, whilst less trams would then be required, and this would reduce tramway expenses. As for the contention that trams are better than buses in the conveyance of passengers, one has only to remember that the council had to obtain legislation to prevent buses plying in competition against them, as otherwise their expensive tram system would have been bankrupt in a year. Personally, I doubt if any expenditure in either manner is desirable. The loan was raised for a traffic tunnel. We will have it. Why spend money on running trams through it, w&en money is needed for much more urgent work.'such as unemployment relief? The Civic League has asked the council to set up an independent Commission to investigate the whole question. What harm can be done by acceding to this very reasonable-request? A refusal to do so naturally leads ratepayers to wonder whether the council is aware of the mistake it is making and wishes to say as little as possible in consequence. Anyhow, the point is very clear, that unless an immediate inquiry is held and the project stopped, our rates will; be heavier next year, and when the mischief is done it will be too late to protest.—l am, etc., W. R. JOURDAIN.