RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION.

Horowhenua Chronicle, 8 October 1931, Page 7

RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION.

LOCAL INTERESTS VERSUS NATIONAL WELFARE. RAILWAY BOARD’S REPORT DEBATED. WELLINGTON. Last Night. When 'the House of Representatives met this afternoon urgency was accorded the debate on the railway lines under construction. Replying to Mr. Black, Mr. Forbes said that under the Railways Amendment Act of last session, where the construction of railway lines had been stopped at the time of the passing of the Act it could not be resumed unless a resolution approving of such a course were submitted to the House. As no resolution of the kind was before the House, the question of the resumption of work did not come mnder consuieratioit;

In moving the resolution that the recommendation of the Railways Board against the construction of the Whara-nui-Parnassus, Putorino-Wairoa and Te Kuha-Inangahua sections of ■ railway lines be approved, Mr. Forbes said that as Minister of Railways it was his duty to do so.' He had never had a more difficult duty. It had to be remembered that for many years he had 'been connected with the agitation in favour of the South Island Main Trunk line, but the position now arose that in'* view of the existing circumstances it had become his duty to move in terms of the resolution. He had to remember that lie. was not only in Parliament as the representative of his electorate, but also as Prime Minister, and as the ibolder'of that office he was in the position of a trustee for the people of the whole country. There were responsibilities on members of the House at rthe present time that did not exiss in ■ordinary times. It had to be recognised that what could be supported under other conditions could not be supported to-day. The Railways Board had reported ihat if the lines under construction were completed it could only mean a big financial loss to the country, 'xne.se losses could only be met by further retrenchments. He felt that the House was of opinion that they should keep the finances in a sound position. Unprofitable railway systems were loaded on to the railway service, and that .was bad from the point of view of the railwaymen. The board’s investigations had been carried out very carefully. , ' Mr. Lysnar: Question! Mr. Black; The board reported before it heard evidence.

Mr. Forbes: For years there has been an accumulation of data on the ques7tion of the lines under construction. .

Mr. Semple: Didn’t you have the same data in 1928?

Mr. Forbes: A lot of water has passed under the bridge since 1928, and unless we face the position the end may be Mr. Forbes said that if the Govern;ment went on the market to raise money for lines that had been con--demned by the board it would have no •chance of getting it. The country had to face the facts of the present. It was no use talking of the past. No one regretted more than he did that the country was not in a position'to afford further expenditure on railway construction. "Every allowance had been made for the facts and figures presented in support of the- railway lines. He did not think the board could be ■charged with having taken a prejudiced view. The Government had the valuable experience of the Railway Department as well as 'experienced men to .guide it in the matter. t)ne "of the weaknesses of the railway construction policy in the past bad been, the local and political influence, and for that reason there had been a strong feeling that an unprejudiced board should be set up to deal with the position. The decisions of a board consisting of men brought in from the business world for the purpose of expressing a free and unprejudiced point of view could not be ignored. At the present time the taxpayers were being asked to find £1,395,000 for railway construction, and the country could not continue constructing lines ■which would be unprofitable and which would add further to the burdens of the taxpayers. • . Mr. Semple: -If the board’s findings are justified, does not that constitute an indictment of the Government responsible for starting’ the work?

Mr. Forbes said that at one time it was possible to contemplete such an expenditure on railways, but while it had then been a sound policy, it was now an unsound one.

The leader of the Opposition (Mr. H. E. Holland) said the Prime -Minister’s speech had amounted to a good reason for Parliament going back to the country immediately. Apart from a few quotations from the board’s report Mr. Forbes had told the House noth'ing. His resolution was just one further instance of the renunciation of the election policy in a manner this country had never before seen. Mr. Forbes knew his party bad secured office on the very policy it was now reversing.

Mr. Holland said he had always regarded the .construction of the main lines as. a sound policy. Railways, like roads, were an important part of the ■producing and organisation of the country. He declared that the correct line of action—in t'act, he thought, the honourable line of action —would have been for the Government to have gone back to the electors and said- it could not give effect to its policy, ■'hud then ask -for the electors’ verdict. He expressed the opinion that if the values created by the construction of the railways had been credited to them there would' have been no losfies, but instead these, values had been allowed to go into the pockets of Individuals. ; The State was now pay-

ing for the mistakes of the past. The Government could, if it. wished, safeguard itself against any possible losses that might be involved in the completion of the lines under construction. He contended that no argument had ever been put up against roads on the basis on which the railways had -»ow been condemned.

Kef erring to the Westport-Inangahua line, Mr. Holland said that its completion had been delayed for years as the result of different parties coming into office. If it had been completed immediately there would have been no loss on it. He thought it inevitable that some other 'Government would eventually have to complete the line, and as a result of the further delay now proposed the Capital charges would be heavier than ever. It was now almost completed, and he asserted that that morning’s deputation had clearly shown that it would pay working expenses.

Continuing, Mr. Holland said the board had recommended against all lines on which it had reported. it seemed that the country was up against a conflict between motor traffic and the railways. The. position, boiled down, amounted to a consideration of the oil interests as, against the national interests.

Mr. W. D. Lysnar insisted that the stoppage of work would be a more unwise policy than completibn. He complained that while mansion railway stations had been provided for places which already had stations, there were “Other districts that were losing millions through not being linked up by the railways. He vigorously advocated the completion of the Napier-Gisborne line.

Mr. K. S. Williams gave notice that he would move an amendment in committee to strike out the reference to the Putorino-Wairoa line. He expressed the opinion that the report should havebeen held over until the transport legislation was disposed of. Referring to the Putorino-Wairoa line, he said that only a small portion required completion, and he considered that the small extra amount should be spent so that the money already expended could give ’some return. A great deal of the land along the line could be improved if the line were there to transport fertilisers to it. There was only 7-i per cent, of the line to complete, and it was sad, if not improvident, to leave the line idle for the sake of the small expenditure. He asked if the Government would be prepared to allow a syndicate or local bodies to take over the line, complete it and run it.

Mr. E. j. Howard said the Government had not been prepared to stop the work, and had therefore set up a board to do so.

Mr. W. J. Poison: That’s an aspersion on decent men.

Continuing, Mr. Howard said that if the railways could get 3d. a ton per mile for all haulage, they would pay. The lines that had been stopped should still be running and could be run if properly managed. The country would have to be opened up and the population increased, and if that was to be done the railways would have to be constructed. The completion of the East Coast and South Island Main Trunk lines would open up a great deal of country capable of development and closer settlement.

The railway debate was continued when the House resumed 1 at 7.30,

Mr. E. F. Healy, criticising the board, Said it, was an irresponsible body which had no mandate from the people, it was composed of men comparatively unknown to the public with one exception and that w r as a man who three times had been rejected by the electors on standing for Parliament. He thought fciif Joseph Ward would - turn in his grave if he knew the work he had started was proposed to Tie turned down at the recommendation of the board. Mr. Healy asserted that the Board had merely rushed through the .country and had not carefully examined the avenues of prosperity that would be opened if the various trunk lines were completed. He had been with them on their trip through the Marlborough district and in his opinion the Board had been in too great a hurry to reach Christchurch. Mr. Healy referred to the situation in which the workers on the WharanuiParnassus section would find themselves if the work were stopped. He said they were contented and capable men and all the necessary housing for them and their families had been provided. He argued that if the Board had its w r ay and the recommendations were adopted it would mean the end of railway construction in New Zealand. He had from the start considered the appointment of the Board was wrong in principle. Referring to the South Island Main Trunk line the Board had stated in its report that it had made several detours. Mr. Healy remarked that he knew of one detour they had made and that was into a wine-cellar (laughter). The owner of the cellar had told him he wished he had never let them taste the wine' (renewed laughter). Mr, Healy characterised the board’s statement that Marlborough had been settled up to the average stage of development of the .-country served by the South Island main trunk line'as ah ins.ane contention. He said there were 1200 acres to the settler in the district and there were a million acres of Crown land. It would be possible to increase the development enormously. Mr. Coates said, the Board’s report had come to him as a surprise, particularly when he had noted that the West-port-Inanghhua line was among those condemned. He had felt that a line linking up the coal areas its this one did would have been justified. The time had come r however* when in view of all the circumstances the country had to decide - whether it could alfofd the money required to‘ complete the lines under construction. He submitted that if 1 , the Hoiise rejected - the Board V recommendations, it would be approving of . an annual loss to the country of not

less than £600,000. He reminded the House that it would shortly have to deal with transport legislation and *he thought members would be wise to await it. This legislation might deal with many of the difficulties to which the Board had referred in announcing its decisions. It was wrong to say that once the recommendations were adopted those portions of the lines which had been constructed would immediately be ripped up. He thought it would be unwise to do anything hasty. Mr. Holland: “You anticipate the lines will eventually be completed then f ’ ’

Mr. Coates: “I don't anticipate anything, but I think it wise to await the development of the transport system. ’■ Continuing, ’ Mr. Coates said there might be companies or syndicates desiring to run some portions of the line. There had been one intimation already that some proposal of the kind might eventuate. It was possible some com pany might desire to buy a portion of the line while on the other hand a group of settlers might desire to guar antee the Government against loss in running the lines. Mr. Coates added that it was possible the economic conditions might later improve sufficiently to enable the Government again to take up some of- the lines.

Referring to the question of finding work for the men who would be displaced, the Minister said he had had a quick look round. Some of them- could be transferred to other . works. He would make a statement shortly as to Cabinet's plans and he thought he could assure the married men at least that they need have no anxiety. Work would be found.

Mr. Semple: “Under the JMo. 5 scheme. ”

Mr. Coates: “ No. ” > Mr. Jordan said Mr. Coates had in 1928 shown that the Dominion would have to spend £18,000,000 more to carry railway freights by road. If that was true then what had happened now? The Board might be right in saying the lines, should not go on, bpt the House had nothing to go on except what the Board said. He moved: That the report of the Board should he referred to the Railways Committee of the House for consideration and report* and that the committee should visit the districts concerned. Mr. seconded the amendment. He said it was the duty of members to accept the full responsibility and not to leave decision to the Board. He considered the report had been drawn up without any recognition having been given to the fact that co-or-dixiation of transport was to be brought about.

Mr. H. M. Campbell asked the Prime Minister if he would be prepared to give a syndicate or a company a chanceto take over the East Coast railway. Mr. Clinkard said that while it might be impossible to go on with the lines it would be foolish to leave short sections of railways unfinished for all time. Bankruptcy statistics showed that road transport could not compete with the railways. He was .not satisfied to support the resolution. Mr, Black said he was not in favour of the resolution, but was in favour of completing all the main railway lines in New Zealand

The debate was continued, nine members svpporting the amendment on various grounds.

Mr. Armstrong stressed the potentialities of the Marlborough . district. Mr. J. T. Hogan referred to the unemployment aspect and remarked more loss was caused by commencing lines and then dropping the work than would -be involved by the completion. Mr. Carr described the Railways Board as irresponsible. The attendance, of members in. the House fell off somewhat as the evening advanced and shortly after midnight the bells had to be set ringing to sum-mon-a quorum. The House was still sitting at 2 a.m.