MR. R. MCKENZIE'S STATEMENTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 14345, 15 April 1910, Page 3

MR. R. MCKENZIE'S STATEMENTS.

Sir,—To-day, for the first time, I looked into Hansard No. 23 (December 22 to 29, 1909). On page 1544 I was astounded to see a detail table of from 1891 to 1909, giving misleading figures, which, together, make up the which Mr. McKenzio says was" spent during that period on railway con l struetion in the North and South Islands of the Dominion. This is what the public records say:—(See the Railways Statement for 1909, page 9, and annual report on working raihvavs, 1891, page 12):—North expenditure: 1909, £13,040,612; 1890, £5,635,095; increase, £7,354,917. South expenditure: 1909, £16,011,820; 1890, £9,479,063; increase, £6,532,757, showing clearly that during these 19 years £13,887,674 has been charged to the Railway Account, and said to have been expended in their construction and equipment. Tho Hon. Roderick McKenzie, Minister for Public Works, has presented to Parliament a table showing year by year what he says was so expended, and totalling the above-stated £6,962,007. Will the lion, gentleman be good enough to tell us what has become of the missing £6,925,667" which, according to him, must have been appropriated, and for which I presume tho Ministry is responsible? . ■ Where Mr. McKenzie got his figures from I cannot imagine. Certainly not from the public records. On presenting this misleading table, he made the following remarks: That return proved conclusively: that the assertions of the honourable members who had so strenuously contended that the South Island railways were being pushed on at tho expense of the North "lad no foundation in fact." , , Samuel vaile.

April 14. , ;■ P S —The £7,354.917 charged to the Northern railwavs includes the £1,000,000 paid for the Wellington and Manawatu.line, but this purchase has conferred no benefit whatever on the North Island. On the contrary the North will certainly hare to pay ny far the largest part of the £40,000 per annum interest, and is not in the least likely, to ret low transit charges. If. therefore, we deduct this £1.000,000, and add the £150.000 paid to the Midland Co. to the Southern account wel cet this result: Northern lines cost £1.040,612, Southern £16,169.820, or £4.129,203 more expended in the South than in the North. . , - v -