THE TUNNEL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXV, Issue 16569, 5 June 1914, Page 5

THE TUNNEL.

GOVERNMENT’S SCHEME. OFFER. FROM HARBOUR BOARD. Tho announcement by the Minister of Railways that the Government would duplicate tho line through the tunnel was discussed by the Lyttelton Harbour Board yesterday, when Mr H. Friedlander moved— That the Minister of Railways having expressed the opinion that the duplication of the railway _ line through tho Lyttelton tunnel is of urgent necessity, this Board strongly endorses the Minister’s opinion, the members having for some considerable time past felt that such duplication will be the means of overcoming the congestion of the traffic between Lyttelton and Christchurch; that tho Railway Department be no'j tiffed that this Board will bo prepared to purchase the material from the proposed tunnel at 2s per ton delivered on the foot of the western breakwater, provided that the work is begun within twelve months of the present date. Tho motion was carried. Mr Friedlander said that the latter part of the motion would show that the Board wished to help tho Government in its work. The Board was there not only to make money but to help the Government to make the working of the port as easy as possible. The question of electrification was a sec- ‘ ondary consideration. Even if it cost a few pairs of white gloves a year the duplication should come first. Mr F. Horrell said that the offer set out in the motion was a liberal one. The arrangement would be mutually beneficial. It would benefit both the Government and tho people of Canterbury. Mr M. J. Miller supported the motion. It certainly was desirable to put in tho last sentence in the motion, otherwise tho offer would stand for all time. He believed that the larger tunnel would abolish the smoke nuisance. It was useless to tall# of electrifying the single line. The motion would encourage tho Government to take tho work in hand as soon as possible. Tho motion was a step in th ■ right direction. It was good business If there was a double line through the tunnel thero would be no necessity to make up so many long trains which took up much time. Mr G. Scott said that he must confess that he was surprised that the motion should bo brought up. The liability imposed upon tho Board shouJ have been considered. Ho did not think that the Christchurch people would support tho motion. In reply to Mr C. J.. Harper, the chairman (Mr R. Moore) said .t was not known what the Government would do with the spoil from tho work. It was not known if the Government intended to make reclamations of lands. .Mr A. Kaye said that it was satisfactory to know that there was i Minister of Railways and a General Manager who were anxious to improve the railway , facilities. Tho motion was an indication that the Board wished to help the Government. It was roughly an offer to contribute £IO,OOO to the cost. Tho Government was caking tho proper course in deciding mat duplication should come before electrification. Tho motion certainly would l)e an encouragement to the Government. He wished to state that the General Manager of the Railways had met tho deputation of citizens who waited upon him in Christchurch. Mr C. Allison moved as an amendment that consideration of the motion should be deferred, and that in the meantime the engineer should prepare an estimate of the probable cost of.; tho proposal ’’ and a report as to whether the Board could profitably deal with the spoil. Lyttelton had a had name on account of tho delays there. The trouble would never bo got rid of as long as trucks were relied upon for tho unloading of vessels. The price mentioned in the motion for the material was more than the Board should pay. As a question of prudence the Board should have further time to consider the proposal. Mr J. Little seconded the amendment. He said that the motion would merely rivet t-lie fetters of which the people had complained so long. There was no doubt whatever that electrification should come first, and duplication afterwards. The. chairman said that ho regretted that there were members of the Board who always voted against any scheme of a progressive character. Ho was pleased to be able to support the mo- j tion. The Board should do all it | could to help the Government. , The i Board could do that without going to any more expense than it would have to meet in any case.. Mr Allison had said that the port had a bad name because of delays. It was the Board’s duty to try to remove that bad name. It eoiikl do so by passing the motion. As a matter of fact, North Canterbury had one of the best ports in Now Zealand. The Government now intended to help the people, yet members of the j Board held back their support. The i duplication of the line was the first consideration. Electrification could J come afterwards. I Mr Scott said that he was progressive, but he could not support the motion unless ho had more information on the subject. In the circumstances he supported the amendment. Mr Friedlander said that the Board should havo been invited to be represented at tho deputation to the Minister. Thero were only two objectors to his motion, and they objected to everything connected with the improve- | mont at port, because they were afraid that it would militate against the j canal schemo. Ho was convinced that tho duplication of the tunnel line would sweep away the delays at port. With a double lino, short trains could run continuously between Christchurch and Lyttelton. With a single line that was impossible- He had consulted tho Board’s engineer in regard to the cost of the proposal to the Board. It would bo about £IO,OOO. But the ex- s pense would be incurred by the Board in any case. It would not cost the Board ono farthing more. On the other hand, it would enable the Board to complete its reclamation sooner than if the material was obtained else- • where. At the same time, the Govj eminent would bo able to do tho work for £IO,OOO less than it would cost if I the proposal was not adopted bv tho Board. Even if it cost £30,000 .it I would bo no loss to the Board, as tho sum would have to be spent in any ! case. I Tile engineer (Mr Cyrus Williams) said that ho had been informed by tho railway authorities that 100,000 tons of spoil will be taken out of the tunnel. On that basis, the cost to the Board would be £IO,OOO. The Board would require more than 100,000 tons for its work at the breakwater. Tho breakwater would not be completed during tho next five or six years, and there was no danger of the breakwater being completed before the tunnel. The amendment was lost and tho motion was carried, only three members voting against it - * i ■