BACK-LOADING FREIGHTS

Greymouth Evening Star, 29 March 1930, Page 2

BACK-LOADING FREIGHTS

RAILWAYS V. SHIPPING.

A lengthy discussion, conducted in an informal manner, took place at the meeting of the Greymoufeh Chamber of Commerce yesterday on the subject of cheaper back-loading freight charges for certain goodf> carried from Christchurch to the West Coast. The matter had been discussed at a recent meeting of the Canterbury Progress League, at which the chairman, Mr G. M. Hall, referred to the business in hay and straw which was sent from Canterbury to the Coast, and he believed that the trade could be very much increased if the railway freights were reduced so that the trains of “ehmpties” returning to the Coast for coal could at least be partly filled. After reading a number of Press clippings, Mr P. J. McLean declared that if there was to be cheap freight on goods coming to Greymouth there should be the same reduction in goods going outwards. He referred to the heavy wharfage and haulage charges made by th© Railway Department on goods going over the Greymouth wharves, and gave specific instances of the relative cost, compared with Lyttelton and railway freights. He cont nded that a protest should be lodged against special rates on goods coming into the district, unless they could get similar reductions on those going out. If the proposals were adopted it would be the people who disposed of goods who would reap the advantage, not die people. The speaker maintained that if it were not for the goods going over the Grey'inouth wharf the railways would not be doing so well, and he maintained that it was shipping which should be encouraged. With that object in view he had asked the Secretary of the Harbour Board to prepare returns of the coal and timber shipped in comparison with that sent over the railways. Competition was the life of trade, and if the railways could not compete with shipping, there were the highways provided by nature. Mr Naylor declared that he did not follow the President’s economic logic. If they could get the requirements of the farmers and others a penny cheaper they should do so. If it paid the Government to send the goods at a cheaper rate, they should avail themselves of it.

Mr F. A. Kitchingham declared that he could not see where the President s motion led to, as goods from Dunedin and Christchurch were not shipped to Greymouth. It was a matter that must be gone into in detail. The Chamber had asked that wheat-straw, chaff and' oats should be back-loaded at a cheaper rate, and if they could get flour and other goods at a cheaper rate as well, they should do so. However, they should protest against anything that might harm their own industries, such as sash and door and furnituremaking, and dairy production. After reverting to the proposals of Mr Pawson, district traffic manager of railways at Christchurch, Mr McLean announced that, as he considered the 7/5 wharfage charged by the Railways Department to be too high, he intended to bring the matter forward with a view to having it reduced. Mr Coates interjected: Did not the Harbour Board sell its rights for a mess of pottage? Mr McLean said that according to the agreement which had been made the Board had no rights and the Railway Department got the wharfage and shunting fees, but he would endeavour to have them reduced. Mr Coates: How are you going to do it? They are a business concern and have a monopoly. Mr Kitchingham suggested that a committee should be appointed to decide upon •vyhat goods they wanted cheaper freights. As for the wharfage and haulage fees reductions, the Harbour Board had not the ghost of a chance, unless it could get a shed of its own. It was the same in regard to terminal charges elsewhere, and he instanced that the charge for a car at Lyttelton was 4/-, whereas at Picton, under Railway's control, it was 7/6. He moved that the Chairman and Messrs J. W. Greenslade and E. McDonnell comprise the committee. Mr Greenslade stated that the Chamber had stressed the need for reduction of freight rates on straw, and winter feed, but had not got it. The Chairman interposed that Mr Pawson had pointed out that the bulk of the lucerne hay for the Coast came from Nelson, and railway rates could not be reduced to compete with it. Continuing, Mr Greenslade urged that the subject should be gone into very carefully to see what advantages and what disadvantages would be derived from it. It was. not desirable that travellers should come ovei’ from Dunedin and Christchurch to scoop the pool, and that had to be guarded against. “What we must do is to get down to tin tacks and consider a schedule of what we want by cheaper rates, and what otherwise,” said .Mr Kitchingham, who asked why, if it were possible to get straw at the cheaper rate, advantage should not be taken of it. The President maintained that manufacturers of machinery would be in favour of reduced rates for backloading, as it would pay them to do so. All were agreed that the main thing was to protect local interests.