Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, DEC, 18, 1935. EAST COAST RAILWAY.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVI, Issue 17, 18 December 1935, Page 8

Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, DEC, 18, 1935. EAST COAST RAILWAY.

Interviewed recently, the Minister for Railways (lion. D. G. Sullivan) stated that an exhaustive examination of abandoned railway works would be undertaken before a decision was made by the Government for their recommencement. Previously, Mr Savage had announced that the East Coast line would be completed and the South Island Main Trunk railway investigated. A close study of all the facts surrounding the cessation of work on these major undertakings, it was thought, would be a prime necessity before a definite decision was reached; but it would appear from Mr Semple’s statements to a deputation at Napier ‘on Monday that the Government has made up its mind on the matter of the East Coast line without first of all examining all the relative factors. “When the decks are cleared for action, you will get your line,” the Minister for Public Works said, and he gave a clear warning to the Railways Board that if it opposes the Government its days are numbered. Mr Semple’s ill chosen words will not nelp to inspire confidence in the Government on the part of those who hoped that Labour in office would not use its majority other than constructively. Mr Semple is inspecting the route of the Napier-Gisborne railway to provide Cabinet with first hand information, which rather seems superfluous in the light of his remarks, which have an important bearing upon past legislation. In 1931 the Government Railways Amendment Act was passed providing that work should not be resumed on a suspended railway until a report by the Railways Board had been laid before Parliament, and a resolution authorising its completion had been passed by both Douses. This measure, which removed the control of railway operations and construction from the Parliamentary, sphere, makes it clear, that' the Railways Board must take the initiative, while it also holds a dominant position in the matter of new works as it is only on its report that Parliament can act.

It seems hardly likely that the Board, which reported most adversely on the Napier-Gisborue line four years ago, has changed its views in the meantime, so that an adverse report would mean the repeal of the 1931 legislation and the end of the Board. In September, 1931, the Board, following an exhaustive examination of construction costs, maintenance, and interest, expressed definitely the opinion that it was not an economic work. The capital cost then was about £3,5UU,000, the total estimated expenditure being £5,U00,U00, and the Board anticipated that were the work completed the annual loss would be almost £291,000, the debt for interest being nearly £250,000. Actually, tile estimated receipts would fall short of working expenses by nearly £40,000. lieveuue was assessed at £<o,ooo, after making necessary allowances for business which would remain with the road and sea services. Tbe cost of the line per mile, running as it does through a sparsely settled area, was £3T,049. Mr Semple has. explained the Government viewpoint that, three and a halt millions having been spent on pai of the undertaking, it would be unwise to scrap it for the expenditure of the balance of one and a half millions The Government is anxious to bring the

unemployed into work and railways provide a good avenue. They are, however, a very costly one and in the final analysis do not solve the problem, being but a palliative. Again, the operation of the East Coast line can only mean a still greater burden upon the system which at present is not paying. The economic factor should be the prime motive in these works; if the Government case in this instance prevails, then each uncompleted line no doubt will be recommenced and that cannot be in the country’s interest.