The Threatened Northern Line

Northland Age, Volume 1, Issue 10, 11 December 1931, Page 1

The Threatened Northern Line

How the Roads Will he Affected If It Is Closed In connection with the threat to * close the Otiria-Okaihau railway line unless it is guaranteed a monopoly 49 of the traffic, the following speech delivered by Mr. Vernon Reed in the Legislative Council on April 23rd during the debate on the bill transferring the control of the railways to the new Directorate will be read with interest. It states the present position very clearly and the effect on the roads if the railway is closed. “I do not think that the railways can be expected to do much in the way of making profits or being successful unless a blow is struck at the root cause of the trouble, —that is, the unfair competition of the road services. If the country would put the Railways Department on exactly the same footing as the motorists, then I guarantee that the railways will show profit—in other words, if the Consolidated Fund would pay for the whole of the railway track, including capital cost and upkeep, leaving only the cost and maintenance of the rolling-stock and the administrative costs to the Railways Department. For several years it has been definitely laid down in the Public Works Statement that it costs Is. 3d. per mile to convey one ton of goods by road, and that it costs 3d. per mile to convey a ton of goods by rail. Now, if that is true, surely it is a suicidal policy for us to continue such an economic waste. My own opinion is that unless something is done very quickly to deal with the traffic on the roads in competition with our railways, this country is going to be “up against it” in the matter of the maintenance of roads. At present, the roads are maintained * primarily by the ratepayers; then comes the Highways Board Fund; then the Government loans. I do • not think the ratepayers—and they are all in the same position today whether they be primary producers or city ratepayers—can stand the burden, because of the hard times. I know that local bodies are reducing their expenditure. On what? On their roads. It must be the expenditure on their roads, because we find that the revenue of the majority of local bodies today goes to the Hospital Boards; to meet interest and sinking-fund payments in respect of • loans ; on administration costs ; and, lastly, on roads. The local bodies know that the primary producers are not able to pay rates, and

are accordingly doing their best to reduce the rates. That means that they are going to reduce their expenditure on roads. We all know wh'at it costs per mile to maintain any class of road. If it is a concrete road, there is interest on capital amounting to anything from £3OO a mile, which would be cheap, up to £SOO or £6OO. If it is a tar-sealed road—and the deputy leader will be able to bear this out—it costs about £IOO per mile per annum to maintain it or the capital is lost. If it is a macadam road, it is impossible to say what it is costing, because, as far as I can see, such roads simply wear out and have to be made all over again. That is the kind of economic , loss that is taking place. Why? Because no one will come forward and make the motorist pay for his track when competing with the railways. It is unfair competition more than anything else that is causing the loss on our railways today. That brings v me to the matter of the closing of “m lines. Lines are being closed as being unprofitable. I can speak of certain cases, and can say that those lines have been made unprofitable absolmotor traffic. The lines I have in mind traffic. The lines I have in mind have made their district: they have been responsible for the growth of small townships. And even where those small townships are located • there are threats to close lines. What I suggest to the Government is this: the people in those districts know full well that they arc- dependent on their railways, but'they have no power at the present time to insist

on all their freight and all their passengers going by rail. Representatives of the Railways Department go into those districts and say, “If you do not send all your goods and all your passengers on the railway, if you do not support the railway, it will be closed.” It is useless to speak in those terms to the people in such a district, because they are powerless. The farmers know that the cutting-out of a railway means difficulty in obtaining their supplies of fertilizers. But they can do nothing: they cannot prevent their neighbours using motor services instead of the railways. There ought to be made provision whereby a vote could be taken on the question whether a particular locality desired a railway or a road service. present position is unfair to the settlers, and, not only are some of them to lose their railway, with all its advantages and benefits, but also they are going to have to find more money to maintain the roads that carry the motor traffic. That indicates an absolute waste, and I think some provision should be made so that the people concerned could say definitely, “We will have the railway and close the roads as far as motor trading is concerned.” It can be done and I am certain that if it is not done sections of railways will be closed in many

cases. And this is what is happening: a section is being closed because it does not pay. That section has been acting as feeder to another section, and, when closed, the section that it has been feeding is in jeopardy of being closed as non-paying; and so it goes on. It will be found that some railways are having sections chopped off at the terminus, and subsequently more chopped off, for the reason that the section is not paying owing to having lost its feeder. One cannot close one’s eyes to the fact that the railways have been responsible for a tremendous lot of development in the country. And although I am not going to oppose the Bill, I say that it is going to be difficult to get the Houses of Parliament to agree to the construction of new railways. It is very difficult to say definitely that a certain prospective railway is going to pay. I can speak feelingly in regard to one railway-line, because I had probably more to do than anyone else towards getting it constructed. I refer to the North Auckland line. I was told right throughout the country that that line would not pay—that it would not pay for axle-grease—and should not be constructed. Had the matter of constructing that line gone before Parliament I am perfectly satisfied the proposal would have been turned down on account of the bad name it had been given. What is the position now? It is a paying line. Any one who knew the country that it is serving before the line was built and who cares to go through that country today can see what great development has taken place, and will say that that alone has justified the construction of the railway.