RAILWAYS BILL PASSED

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 93, 21 April 1931, Page 9

RAILWAYS BILL PASSED

SOUTH ISLAND MAIN TRUNK TWO UNITED MEMBERS TAKE STAND The main business of the House of Representatives yesterday ■was the further consideration of the Government Railways Amendment Bill, for which the Prime Minister asked for urgency, and the measure was put through all its stages before the House rose at 1.30 o'clock this morning. The powers of the board of directors to investigate and report on suspended lines and lines under construction took up most of the discussion, and ihe South Island Main Trunk was naturally one of the chief topics. When the Government was challenged on this question, Messrs. E. F. Hcaly (United, Wairau) and T. Makilanara {United, Southern Maori) voted against their parly. , '

Mr. G. C. Black (Independent, Motucka) moved to delete the provision that work on suspended lines should not be resumed until both Houses of the Legislature have passed resolutions authorising their completion. He pointed out that, notwithstanding a declaration by the Acting-Prime Minister last September that the suspension of railway lines was a matter .for Parliament and not for Cabinet, -work had been suspended on several lines without the authority of the House, but only by decree of Cabinet, and then at a time when the Prime Minister was absent at the Imperial Conference. Mr. "VV. D. Lysnar (Independent, Gisborne) said he would support the amendment. He could not understand the action of the Prime Minister in forcing the proposal through, as the Fay-Bavon report had recommended that construction works should be kept out of the hands of the board. It was for the Government to control the construction of new lines. He had no faith in the" board. It looked as if the Government was endeavouring to avoid the criticism of the House. The Leader of the Labour Party (Mr. 11. E. Holland) said the Government liad given a definite promise that the Midland line was not to be stopped, but merely suspended. He wondered if any promise had been given in respect of the Kirikopuni line, and asked if it was a fact that work had been resumed on that line. Mr. B. Seinple (Labour, Wellington ißnst): "Perhaps that's part of the bargain." Mr. Holland asked how the resumption of work on the Kirikopuni line could be squared with the statements v/hich had beea made by the Minister of Education and other Ministers in condemnation of tho line. LINES SHOULD PAY. The Prime Minister said that all that ■was being done at Kirikopuni was to /■lear up the line as far as Tangiwahine. No construction work was being gone on with. Mr.' P. Fr.nser '(Labour, Wellington Central): "What is tho intention?" Mr. Forbes said it was advisable that those responsible for the management of the Railway Department should consider whether railway lines were going to be a payable proposition. The board had to submit a report to Parliament, and the whole matter was in tho hands of Parliament, which had to approve or otherwise. Surely members would not advocate a lino being gone on with if the lino was going to place a heavier burden on the railways than they were already carrying. One of the strongest objections made by officers of the Bailway Department was that the Department had been asked to carry lines that were a losing proposition. In future there would have to be sufficient merit about a line before its construction could be undertaken. That was a very, necessary step at the present time. They had entered upon a stage at which they had to be extremely careful in the. expenditure of money. He thought it was a very wise precaution to decide that there should bo a very careful examination of the proposal before any line was reopened. In the past there there had always been a suggestion that lines ■which were being constructed by the Government were of a political nature, but the fear of that would be removed as a result of his proposal. A COMPREHENSIVE INQUIRY. The Leader of Iho Opposition (the Bight Hon. J. G. Coatos) said he wished that Mr. Holland's surmise was correct. The lines were being taken up. "What will that cost?" asked Mr. Black. Mr. Coatcs replied that it would not "be great, for it only, involved a mile and a half of sleepers and plates. Ho went on to say that the Reform Party was committed to a comprehensive inquiry into all railway lines under construction. Mr. F. Langstono (Labour, Waimariuo): "What about the Botorua-Taupo line1?." Mr. Coates said that it would not be economical to go on with that now, for a permanent road had been constructed. "I agree," he said, "that under present circumstances —under our restricted economic conditions—it was not wise to fire ahead full tilt with the construction of railway lines. It has not been possible for tho Government to carry out its railways programme on account of tho changed economic conditions. The Reform Party asked last session for a review of three of tho main, lines—the Midland, South Island Main Trunk, and Gisborno lines." Mr. Lysnar: "Not Kirikopuni?" Mr. Coates: "Well, you can put that in if you like." Mr; Lysnar: "But you didn't." The Leader of the Opposition submitted that an injustice had been done iv tho clause under discussion. The suspended lines were starting behind scratch, as it were. They would be subject to review, but not the South Island Main Trunk, which was proceeding. Moreover, under Iho proposed clause, the South Island. Main Trunk construction work would continue for eighteen months before it would be possible for Parliament to deaj with it. The new Hallway Board would not assume office till noxt June, and there would hardly be time to report on it next session, so that it would not. bo possible to report on it until August or September next year. That being the case, it would bo impossible to review the work the Eeform members urged there should be an investigation into. Mr. J. S. Fletcher (Independent, Grey Lynn): "It is a deliberate dodge.'' The Chairman: "Order!" Mr. Coates: "I do not'suggest that." In his electorate, he said there was a line which was within twenty minutes' walking distance of being completed. He had no objection to the lino being stopped, on tho ground or! national pconomy. His electors were urging him to take decisive action to get it completed. It would cost only £20,000. But ho had said that, on account of the economic position, there was need for caution. He objected to the South Inland line' not coming under review

the same as the others. It seemed reasonable that there should be an investigation of that line. RIGHT TO VETO . Mr. F. Langstone (Labour, Waimarino) asked why tho clearing up that was being done at Kirikopuni was not being done on all the other suspended lines. The Prime Minister's answer was not satisfactory. The clause gave the Upper House the right of veto against a unanimous decision of both the board and the Lower House-, and there was nothing democratic in the proposal. The question of railway construction had not changed since Sir .Joseph Ward's announcement of his programme. Mr. W. J. Poison (Independent, Stratford): "What about the depresion?" Mr. Langstone: "Some people have a mental depression." Mr. W. E. Barnard (Labour, Napier) said that it was not right that the Legislative Council s.hould have any say on the question whether the construction of lines should be continued or not. Mr. E. Semplo (Labour, Wellington Bast) asked whether it was a business transaction to break up a camp, send the men away, and then re-organ-ise a camp. "I want to know where the Prime Minister was taught business methods," asked Mr. Semple. Over £3,000,000 had been spent on the Gisborne lino and it would take £1,000,----000 to complete the job. The people of New Zealand would pay interest on £3,000,000 and got no return, while the people. of Gisborne would not get a railway. Mr. Black said th^t the sub-clause did not recognise the fact-that 42 members of the House were in favour of one line which had been suspended by Cabinet in the absence of the Prime Minister. If tho lines were to be suspended they should be suspended by the House'itself. The House was also entitled to the data upon which tho Government had based its estimated losses on the lines. Anyone who knew tho area to be tapped by the Midland railway naturally asked why no evidence had been called from, the Mines Department or the Geological Survey. It was stated in a report to the Mines Department that the line would tap 80,000,000 tons of coal. Mr. D. G. Sullivan (Labour, Avon) said that there was no provision to compel the board to report and yet tlio House could.not proceed until the board had reported. Mr. Black: "Why should they boss Parliament?" Mr. Sullivan said that the board should be called upon to report within a specified time. This would meet the wishes of the House. It was absolutely essential that a _ time limit should be fixed just as it was in connection with reports from Commissions. A report could be delayed for years, and thus the wishes of Parliament could be defeated. Still even- with such an amendment the whole position was impossible. . Mr. Lysnar suggested that if the board did not approve of a line it could not be gone on with, as the whole matter was taken out of the hands of the House. The hands of the House should not be tied. Mr. Coates: "Does the hon. gentleman think this is a suitable time to borrow money?" "Oh, we're not discussing that, "declared Mr. Lysnar with some heat. BEGINNING OF THE END. Mr. M. J. Savage (Labour, Auckland West) said tho Government's proposal looked like the beginning of the- end of the railway system of New Zealand. The Government would have difficulty in convincing the country that the railway system should bo destroyed. The Prime Minister said railway authorisation Bills had to bo passed by both Houaeß of Parliament, so tho principle in the present Bill was not a new one. It was the special duty of the board to see that railways which were started would make a reasonable contribution to the profits of the Department. There was no reason why the board should not report to Parliament next session, as all the facts and figures were available in tho office of the Bailway Department. Mr. Lysnar: "They are not worth twopence." Mr. Forbes said he had had no say as to which railways should be closed down, as he was out of the country at the time and had left the whole matter to the judgment of his colleagues. It was necessary that they should look closely into any works of construction, as people abroad who had money to invest naturally wanted to know whether the railways were going to pay or not. Mr. Black: "Do they lend on. tho railways or on the country?" Mr. Forbes said it might have been all very well to go on with construction work a few yoars ago, but conditions woro far different to-day, and they had to look upon the question of railway construction in the light of pre-sent-day conditions. WILL BOARD TAKE EVIDENCE? Mr. K. S. Williams (Reform, Bay of Plenty) asked whether the board would be prepared to take evidence from local people interested in the- particular lines under review. He also nsked whether the Railway Board would be supplied with a copy of the Transport Bill before it made its report. Mr. W. Nash (Labour, Hutt) said that it was only right that tho men who ran the railways should have some say in the construction policy, but there was no need to set up a board to see that they had that say. If they were going to give the Upper House a right to vote on the railways, then it should also bo given a vote on every school and every post office which was erected. If the railways were to be proceeded with they should be gone on with on tho evidence of the present and not of the past. Tho fullest investigation on all lines should be placed before tho House. Mr. J. O'Brien (Labour, Westland) said that the members of the board who apparently would not have any technical knowledge of railway running or construction wero to report to tho House on the question whether linos wore to be be completed or not. Mr. Fletcher said .that the Prime Minister had stated that his colleagues had suspended construction on the lines and he, had nothing to do with tho decision to continue tho South Island

Main Trunk. However, Iho Prime Minister had been back three months and had had plenty of time to go into the situation. It was very evident that Ihe Governmet did not intend to report to Parliament next session on the South Island Main Trunk or any other railway. MATTER TOR GOVERNMENT. Mr. D. Jones, (Reform, Mid-Canter-bury) said tho vote which had been taken as to whethej the- railways should be gone on with 'or not was a party vote, and not tho considered opinion of tho House. The statement of the Prime Minister that investors would want to know the prospect of. a return on tho money they loane:l was perfectly sound. Tho decision as to whether lines should bo proceeded with or not was one for the Government to make, and he hoped the Government would not entirely shelter behind the board. Mr. Semple nsked if the Eeform Government had consulted tho investors when it had spent millions of pounds on railway works and on hydro-electric schemes. The Government had gone right back on the pledges it had made in connection with railway construction. Mr. Jones said the Eeform Party in its loan ' prospectuses had stated quite definitely how much money it was proposed to spend ou railways and hydro-electric works. Mr. Black's amendment was defeated by 35 votps to 17. SOUTH ISLAND LINE. The Priino Minister then moved an amendment giving the board authority to report within one year on any line under construction, tho report to be laid on the table of both Houses, and Ibe subject to their approval. He said that several speakers had pointed out that the board might not report, but members of the board themselves would recognise that the position was unsatisfactory, and would feel that a report \ras necessary. The Hon. AY. Downic Stewart (Reform, Duncdin. West) considered that the Government should suspend the South Island Main Trunk line until a report was made. Mr. FJotcher said that it was absolutely necessary that the House should be furnished with all the data in connection with the South Island Main Trunk railway, and be given the opportunity of passing judgment on if. Tho Leader of the Opposition agreed with the suggestion made by Mr. Stewart. It was a matter of satisfying the country as to which line under construction or suspended construction would give the greatest development sinco they did not have the money to go on with all of them. All should be subjected to an impartial investigation. The Minister of Bailways (the Hon. W. A. Veiteh) said he thought members would agree that the Prime Minister was not likely to advocate the completion of a line unless he was convinced that it-was warranted, even, if it did run through his electorate. There would be ample time for the board to go into the question of the South Island Main Trunk railway in order to submit a report during the next session of Parliament. Mr. Sullivan jocularly remarked that the Minister of Eailways had been rocking the boat in crossing swords with the Leader of the Opposition. . GOVERNMENT MEMBER'S VOTE. Mr. E. F. Healy (United, Wairau) said that he would vote against the Prime Minister's amendment. Practically the whole of the Press had been organised .against the South Island Main Trunk. Members wero asking for a full inquiry, but the FayBavcn Commission had recommended it. Mr. «T. A. Nash (Kcform, Palmorstou North): "That is the ferry steamer." Mr. Healy said that in four .years there would not be one passenger boat running between Lyttelton and Wellington. Members should inspect the country through which the line was to go before they criticised it. Mr. Fraser said the House would respect Mr. Healy's defence of his election pledges. Ho must feel that his Government had badly lot him down. "To-night wo are erecting the scaffold on which every line will be executed," declared Mr. Fraser. It was the preliminary to the stopping of all lines. Mr. B. A. Wright (Eeform, Wellington Suburbs) said he was convinced that it would be a mistake to go ahead with the South Island Main Trunk. All lines should be inquired into by unbiased people; Mr. T. Makitanara (United, Southern. Maori) said that tho present Government had been returned to complete the main trunk lines, bxit it the financial depression warranted a further hearing of thecaso it was a different question altogether. "Iv loyalty to my late chief and the people who sent me here, I am going to vote against the amendment," he said. Mr. C. A. Wilkinson (Independent, .Egmont) said he was sorry to sec the position Mr. Healy and Mr. Makitanara found themselves in. .Ho was one of those who held the opinion that the South Island Main Trunk should never have been started. Mr. Sullivan congratulated Mr. Makitanara on remaining loyal to his pledges, and expressed the hope that the member for Invercargill (Mr. Vincent Ward) would also vote, against the amendment. The Leader of the Opposition said that the Fay-Eaven report recommended tho South Island Main Trunk line only if a train ferry was established. He suggested that as soon as tho board was set up the inquiry should be carried out. It was essential that th-ey should have an impartial inquiry. BREAKING PLEDGES. The Leader of tho Labour Party, said that the clause was a piece of legislation which would enable the United and Eeform Parties to break their election pledges. The United Party won at least two seats —Wairau and Motueka—on. its policy. No one could quarrel with a Government which revised or changed its policy from time to time, but when a Government somersaulted it was in honour bound to go to tho electors. This was one of the most unfortunate pieces of legislation that had come before the House, because it meant that they could not placo any reliance on tho solemn pledges of tho United and Eeform Parties in the future. Mr. Parry said that the Government had pushed out one member when he refused to vote for tho Finance Bill, and ho wondered how it would deal with the two rebels on the present clause. It was a.most interesting situation. Mr. Wright said that ho did not blame the Government for reviewing railway construction or any other policy in the light of tho present financial depression. Mr. Fraser said that if the verdict was left to the board the. prosperity of the country as a whole would not be taken into account. Tho board would simply consider the lines from the commercial aspect. Tho board was not the correct tribunal to which to refer the lines. It would be better to set up a Commission to make an investigation from the national viewpoint. The Prime Minister said that if the board brought down a report from a railway point of view the House could consider it from a national point of | view. Mr. Fraser: "Will it be cneumbcut on llih Minister of Eailways to move the adoption of the report?" Mr. Forbes replied that the Minister would sec that a vote was taken. In tho event of one House disagreeing with the other, the position would bo thai tho construction of the line would

continue. Ho agreed that the local viewpoint should bo taken into consideration, but the national aspect had also to be given weight. I expect the board to make a report on all these lines to the next session," said the Prime Minister. Ho added that tho ground had been well gone over and it should not take tho board very long to make up its mind. * Mr. Coates interjected that the report could not be ready before September. Tho Prime Minister's' amendment was carried by 35 votes to 16. There was another challenge on the clauso giving tho board power to close unprofitable linos, but the clause was carried by 3G votes to IG. Discussing the clause relating to the accounts and statements to bo prepared in respect to the railways, Mr. W. Nash said that he hoped that all the information hitherto given would be given in the future. Mr. M. J. Savage (Labour, Auckland West) said that the power given to the board to engage temporary employees at rates of pay as it from time to time determined might lead to tho cutting of rates of pay, and he moved a proviso that such rates of remuneration and conditions bo at least equal to tlioso in the classification list. Tho amendment was defeated by 3D votes to 3C. The remaining clauses were passed without discussion, and tho third .reading was agreed to by 03 votes to 15. The Bill was passed.