The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED DAILY. MONDAY, JANUARY 5, 1931. IS AIR TAVERNER THE STUMBLING-BLOCK?

Gisborne Times, Volume LXXII, Issue 11405, 5 January 1931, Page 4

The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED DAILY. MONDAY, JANUARY 5, 1931. IS AIR TAVERNER THE STUMBLING-BLOCK?

It is pleasing to learn tnat the Hon. Mr Taverner .(Minister for Public Works) will also be present when the Acting-Prime Minister (Mr Ransom) receives the railway delegation at Well'ington this week. As the matter is of more than local inter-est-—so many men risk being thrown out of employment that it is of national importance—it would, indeed, only be right and proper that every Cabinet Minister in Wellington, or within easy reach, should bo in attendance. There is a very particular meed for the presence of Mr. Taverner because it is so -widely believed that be is the main opponent in Cabinet against the local line. In this connection, attention has already been drawn to the fears which that Minister expressed when the Public Works Estimates were before the House that, too much further expenditure was taking'place with reference to railway works. In view of fife, fact that it is, rightly or wrongly, supposed that Air. Taverner is the paramount stumbling-block in regard to the continuance of the local work, it is. well, therefore, to refer to his. comments when it was proposed that the Select Committee on railways construction should be se.t. up. “'Speaking as tho Alinister in charge of railway construction,” he remarked mi that occasion, “I realise that the position is every day, as one might, say, becoming metre acute, and it is only right that the House should have an opportunity of going into, the whole question. . . .Tho subject is.a, big one, and tho order of reference is comprehensive, and an opportunity now, exists for tho House to have the whole question! raised above party consideration. . • The railway lines •that were built in the past were those that were easy and comparatively inexpensive to* construct. At that time the railways had a monopoly of transportation, but today, there is. not that monopoly.” In effect, Air Taverner was urging members of the. House to suggest that some of the new lines should he stopped. Immediately, the Acting Prime Alinister followed in similar vein, AIV Ransom, it may be recalled, said he. did not agree with a contention put forward by a Reform member to the effect that, the question of; railways construction should be one for the government to handle: “I do hot agree with him,” .remarked Air. Ransom. ‘“I consider that great national issues require the consideration of the I-louse as a whole; and whilst the. party in power for the time being must accept a considerable shaire of the responsibility for any decisions arrived at, I am of opinion that on such an important issue the decisions should he given by a majority of the House, and not solely by the government of the day. • . AVe have now arrived at a stage of the railway construction, policy of the Dominion when I feel—and the other members of the government agree with me in this—that a full, measure of responsibility must be taken by the House; as a whole.” Mr. ’Ransom- is. however, now faced, with the difficulty that the government never permitted the House to assist in- settling the; problem as to. whether or not any of the lines under construction! should he stopped. The Select Committee which dealt With) the matter would have been prepared to'make further investigation during the- recess, but the gov- ; eminent would not allow it to d° so. On its part, the Opposition was' willing.. that the House should adjourn. for a. period sufficient to enable the. Committee to produce a .re-; port, but the government preferred to allow the House to .go into, recess. This point, therefore, should, not be; overlooked: -if thq government, be-, lieved in September that Parliament should share the responsibility with it in regard to./this momentous question, what transpired that caused the government, after the House went, into, recess,' to decide ‘to ■ shoulder tho responsibility alone? Probably, the correct answer is Mr. Tavor.n cn-’s. stubborn attitude on the inattefr. for 'he had made 'it cldar—quite apart .from .what The House might hold —that expenditure;, in respect of railway construction should be, curtailed. V'i. .The deputation .which, is to meet' Afinisters .sliqnla not depart without impressing- the pcrfnt that, if the government is not prq*

.pi«jiM;. : 'der* on in regard to the; local line, \/ should allow the Work to go. von until Parliament can l bo convened. Not' for a single moment, do wo believe that a majority of the members .of the House will agree;to the closing (Town of such .an'important section of new railway. ,