RAIL AND MOTOR

Manawatu Times, Volume LIV, Issue 6863, 19 March 1929, Page 10

RAIL AND MOTOR

Competition in Australia ECONOMIC MISSION'S REPOET. SYDNEY, Jan. 17. Periodically the question of the competition between tho railways and the motor comes up for discussion in Australia, and interest in the subject has been renewed by the report of the British Economic Mission, which is certainly strongly opposed to the construction of lines that are not likely to pay their way. Australia has many nonpaying lint’3 already in existence —the political type so well known in New Zealand —and there is a continuous clamour for more of a like nature. The mission counselled delay in dealing with these many applications uulil a full investigation has been made into the possibilities of road transport. It is contended that it would be bad policy to extent tho railway system in any direction before a complete inquiry is made for the purpose of ascertaining whether neglected districts would not better and more economically served by concrete roads.

The policy of the New South Wialcs Government, as laid down by the Premier (Mr. Bavin) the other day is that motor vehicles should co-opcrate with the railways and that being so there is some reason to hope that the advice given by the mission will be heeded in this state at least. Mr. Bavin docs not accept tho view that road transport necessarily acts as a detriment to the railways as a whole. He believes that the motor is bringing, and will continue to bring, a very considerable revenue to the railways, although in some cases he admitted that good roads bad led to competition. The bcnelits to tho community of motor transport, shook., to some extent, act as a set-off against any probable losses to 011 c service from this competition. The road which ran parallel to the railway frequently acted as a main feeder to the railway, for tho reason that the road was called upon to carry tho concentrated traffic of tho minor.or feeder roads, functioning with it at points between railway sidings, and without it the concentrated traffic could not reach tho loading stations. The railways were a national asset and had to be protected. Moreover tho railways had to be mado to pay, and it might be that tho result would be achieved by building first-class feeder roads rather than branch lines of railways. Motors could never compete with the railways in the long-distance transport of goods. The Economic Mission was made to realise that. “Australia recognised the value of good roads.” Expenditure on roads,” it said, “is rightly regarded as the first necessity of development, and as wo have already indicated in dealing with the subject of railways, railways should be. built, only if and when transport is proved to be impracticable or uneenomical.” It may be recalled that the committee of the mechanical transport of the Migration and Development Commission, in a report issued iust year, dealt with the estimated cost of mechanical transport compared with branch railway operations, and submitted “that apart from the advantage of deferring capital expenditure upon prospective non-paving branch railways, mechanical road transport could be economically used for new development areas.” There are simple signs that a very severe brake is being put upon further railway construction in Australia.