Manawatu Daily Times [ESTABLISHED 21st MAY, 1875.] TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 1921. THE RAILWAYS.

Manawatu Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 1979, 22 November 1921, Page 4

Manawatu Daily Times [ESTABLISHED 21st MAY, 1875.] TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 1921. THE RAILWAYS.

.■ i ■ That the railway system of New Zealand is being run at a loss is made striidngly manifest by the returns that are published from time to time in olhcial documents. Whether this loss is the result of bad management, or of Ministerial ineptitude anu bungling, has not been ciearly established. It is significant that some of the strongest supporters of the Government are urging that immediate steps be taken to place the railway service upon a more satisfactory footing. The "New Zealand Herald," for instance, makes some pertinent enquiries concerning the intentions of JViinisters in the matter. It points out that three months ago the services were curtailed with a view to preventing the heavy losses that were shown on working account alone. When these measures were brought into operation, there was a deficit of £47,331, but instead of the position having been improved, the loss on working has increased to £55,978. It is true that the loss in the last four-weekly period has been only £1707, but the essential feature of the returns published yesterday is that the net earnings in the North Island were the highest for the year, with the exception of one period, while those in the. South Island were the lowest, with the exception of one period. No reference to conditions in other countries will explain the fact that while the North Island railways were able to earn a profit of £35,271, those in the South Island were run at a dead loss of £36,978. The consequence is that the users of the North Island railways are being taxed to make up the deficiency on the working account of the southern system, and that the community is being taxed to pay the interest bill on the whole unprofitable enterprise. Probably a small balance toward interest charges will be shown at the end of the year, but the country will have to find, a subsidy out of taxation approaching £1,500,000 to pay the interest bill. It cannot afford to do this. What consolation is there in Mr Massey's vision of "signs of improvement" to merchants who are facing hard times, to industries that are embarrassed by difficulties, to farmers working on pre-war values? No one offers them subsidies out of the Consolidated Fund. They are compelled to make up the losses that are being incurred by the railways either because the management is incompetent or because political influence ties the hands of the general manager. Instead of telling us that the position is improving, when the official returns flatly contradict him, Mr Massey should say what the Government proposes to do to relieve the taxpayers of a burden which should never have been imposed on them. If the staff of the head office is at a loss, has the Government the courage to cast out the weak men and replace them by officers capable of running the railways efficiently and without subsidies? If it is satisfied that Mr McVilly and his colleagues are competent to do this, will it give them an absolutely free hand to reorganise the whole system? Political infuience and subsidies out of taxation are utterly inconsistent with efficient railway management, and it is the business of the Government to eliminate both of them.