N.Z. AIR SERVICES

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume 80, 30 November 1945, Page 6

N.Z. AIR SERVICES

STATE OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL BILL PASSED BY HOUSE (From Our Parliamentary Reporter) Wellington, Nov. 29. The New Zealand National Airways’ Bill providing for State ownership and control of the Dominion’s air services, was passed by the House of Representatives. ' Moving the second reading of the Bill, the Minister in Charge of Civil Aviation (Mr Jones) said that the need for such a measure had been recognised in many other countries. He believed it was imperative that such a powerful instrument of public utility as internal airways should be owned by the Government in the interests of the people. He personally believed that but for the war, the internal airways would have been taken over by the State some years ago. New Zealand favoured Government control of international airways, but as there were difficulties over that policy it supported the alternative of State services within the British Commonwealth, and he believed that the day would come when the airways of the British Commonwealth would operate as a single unit. If New Zealand believed in that principle, then the nationalisation of its internal airways was imperative. The aircraft being taken over comprised, from Union Airways, three Lockheeds, one Lodestar, and one D.H. 86; from Air Travel, two D.H. Fox Moths, one D.H. Dragonfly and one D.H. Rapide, said Mr Jones. Two of these aircraft had been made available by the Government to the companies. “Are you leaving them any? Is that all they have got?” asked the Leader of the Opposition (Mr H. Holland). That was all they had, agreed the Minister, who said that they had done a good job with a limited number of aircraft. Those were the aircraft which would be available for civil aviation services until supplemented by new machines. Some Dominies belonging to the Air Force would probably be available, in addition. GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES When applications were first made for licenses, said the Minister, it was stated that no subsidies were required, but representations were later made for assistance. The subsidy granted to Union Airways in 1938 amounted to £22,500; in 1939 to £12,500, and in 1940 to £ll,ooo—a total of £46.000 paid to the company to cover losses over those three years. Mr M. H. Oram (National, Manawatu): Wasn’t it 60 per cent of their loss? The Minister said he could not be sure on that point, but would ascertain it later. So far as the civil services were concerned, he said, they had done splendid work, but they could never have given the service if it had not been for the assistance received from the Government. Towards thirteen aerodromes, he said, the local bodies had contributed £233,516, and the Government had contributed £829,585. That did not include a very large sum of money paid out for military airfields. Mr Jones quoted the amounts contributed towards various airports, and said that in the case of Rongotai the local bodies had contributed £69,732, and the Government £39,435. He also referred to the assistance which had been given to aircraft operators in the way of provision of services such as direction-finding and the furnishing of meteorological information and equipment. Another substantial form of subsidy was in regard to mail contracts. The arrangement had been, he said, for the payment of 3s for every pound of mail carried by air. Quite recently Union Airways had been approached, and they agreed that that charge was too high, and as a result it had been reduced to 2s a pound.

LINK WITH AIR FORCE He thought that all would agree that civil aviation should not be divorced from the Air Force, said Mr Jones, and that there should be a link between the two. If that link-up which was envisaged were maintained it would mean that the meteorological, radio directionfinding and other services which were common to both civil and Service aviation could be used for the benefit of both. COOK STRAIT AIRWAYS Mr H- Atmore (Independent, Nelson) said he believed that the Government should have an overriding control of all major transport activities, but at the same time, when a company was doing excellent work then he thought the position could be met if the Government had 51 per cent of the shares in the company. He was referring, he said, to Cook Strait Airways, which had such a wonderful record. Before the war they were flying five trips each way between Nelson and Wellington, and they had carried 80,000 passengers without a single accident during the time they were in operation. The public were completely satisfied, and so v-as the whole staff. In order to acquire a controlling interest such as he suggested, the Government need not pay over any money, but the equipment it had put in during the war period could be taken over as the State’s contribution towards the 51 per cent of the holdings. The people of the district were proud of the service, and would be perfectly satisfied if there were State control over the local direction, which with expert management had proved its worth so effectively in the past. Mr M. H. Oram (National, Manawatu) appealed to the Government to exercise true co-operation between State enterprise and private enterprise. Had the Bill been brought down because the Government believed that under Government control there would be greater efficiency, or because it was driving blindly towards the ideal of nationalising everything? He believed it was an endeavour to grab a concern once it had become established and once private enterprise had taken all the risks.

Mr H. T. Morton (National, Waitemata) quoted heavy losses made by the State-owned air services of South Africa, adding that the Minister of Defence had not told the House what losses he anticipated through State ownership in New Zealand. The private companies, operating less than eight aircraft had carried in New Zealand 52.424 passengers in one year, with a safety record which was remarkable. Air transport in New Zealand cost 3.75 d per mile, and although the United States rate of 3£d was slightly better it must be remembered that petrol in New Zealand was three times the price. As for regularity of service, Mr Morton said the New Zealand record for the air was 99 per cent. Mr F. W. Doidge (National, Taurangn) said that no real justification had been given for the taking over of the companies. As the session neared its end they had had a spate of major legislation designed apparently to complete the process of socialism in New Zca ■ land. A plan by which private enterprise would work hand in hand with WANTED KNOWN! VAREX method relieves worst cases of Varicose Ulcers and bad legs in four to six dressings. Easily applied at home. Free Booklet Ernest Healey, Pharmaceutical Chemist, 2t Grey street. Wellington.—Advt.

t the State would have met with the ap- » proval of the people of the country. Mr E. P. Aderman (National, New i Plymouth) said the Opposition was not > opposing a measure of Government , control for the national air lines but • ownership of the lines by the State. | MINISTER’S REPLY 5 The Minister, in reply, suggested that I Opposition speakers, in contrasting ■ military control favourably with Gov- ’ ernment control, omitted to state that • the Services carried out the instructions of the Government. Government control of airways in South Africa had , been criticised, but the critics did not . ! mention that the air services were conI ! ducted by the railway administration, ! and one of the reasons for their.finan- [ j cial failure was that they were usi'd 1 : only for travel where there were no i railways. j The losses of Union Airways in four 1 ! years till 1940. totalled £69.486. and the Government, by direct subsidy, paid £46.000. Very substantial financial assistance was given to the private airways system by the financial success of Cook Strait Airways during the wrrj years. Not only did the private companies get the direct subsidies. but ; they were paid a fairly high rate for i mails.