PASSES SECOND

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXVI, Issue 100, 8 April 1936, Page 7

PASSES SECOND

control the railways can control road transport too. That is what we will do. Mr Roy said that road carriage of stock had come to stay, because in many cases it was much more convenient. Mr Semple: If. we can’t give service we can’t expect the farmers’ patronage. Mr J. Hargest (Nat.) spoke of the much improved service the railways to-day gave its users compared with fifteen years ago, and said it was not wise to construct good roads alongside the railways. There was room for both, provided they were under proper control, and he thought the board was the best means of achieving that con trol. He believed the Minister of Transport was capable of making a good service out of the present one, but did not think he was wise to take control out of the hands of the board. Mr H. G. Dickie (Nat.) spoke of the political pressure that would be brought to bear on the Minister if he took control of the railways. He supported the completion of the. Gisborne-Napier line, but said that if the South Island main trunk line was completed it would be a political job. MR, STERLING’S POSITION. Mr J. G. Coates (Nat.) said he doubted if New Zealand had produced many men of the calibre of Mr Sterling. He would not like it thought the Minister had directed attention to the chairman otherwise than in a favourable light. The Minister’s remarks were directed against the acting-chair-man. He did not think that under Ministerial control the railways would receive the same supervision as under the board. Ho asked the Minister to state whether ho thought Mr Sterling was incapable in the capacity of chairman of the board or railway officer.

Mr Coates asked what test in the development of railways was to bo applied in reaching a decision whether or not this or that line should be completed. He referred to the “balloon loop,’’ and said there was an idea that that had been constructed to the benefit of his (Mj Coates’s) property, but his property was fifty miles away. He invited the fullest investigation into the construction of that line. He was ready to accept responsibility for cessation of work on certain railway works. He claimed that the board had done valuable work, that tho chairman had performed his duties faithfully and well, and that members had done their work to the best of their abilities.

MINISTER IN REPLY. The Hon. D. G. Sullivan, Minister of Railways, claimed that the carriage of goods by laud, sea and air needed co-ordination, and the provision in the new Bill was almost identical with the provision under which tho railways had been working throughout almost their whole history. He reminded the Opposition that the proposals for construction of any new line would have to come before the House when money was sought to build it, and members would have the opportunity to discuss it. The thing that struck him most during the debate was the amazing misrepresentation that was indulged in in regard to the Railways Board. He was dealing with the principle in his remarks, not persons, and ho explained that at the beginning of his remarks and again at the end. He withdrew nothing. He did not say Mr Reese had tendered against the Mamaku mill. He imputed nothing improper to Mr Reeso or Sir James Gunson, but the system was wrong. The second reading was carried by 52 votes to 17 and the House roso at 0.10.