THE OTIRA TUNNEL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18552, 9 November 1923, Page 8

THE OTIRA TUNNEL.

The enthusiasm with which Canterbury advocated the construction of the Otira tunnel has already given place to grave anxiety. A deputation, which presented to the Minister for Railways u formidable programme of proposals, recommendations and demands, frankly declared that if the line did not pay the department was going to lose more than over any other line in New Zealand. Their explanation was that virtually the only goods traffic is from weSt to east, and that " empty waggons comprise the bulk of the trains westward bound." because shipping freights are lower, and Christchurch ' merchants cannot afford to use the railway while rates by sea arc manifestly in their favour. The deputation did not propose that, since the tunnel was built to placate Canterbury, *it would undertake a campaign to encourage the diversion of traffic to the railway. It peremptorily asked the Minister to introduce a special tariff of low rates on goods from Christchurch to the West Coast so that it would pay shippers to use the line. Of course, it was contended that this subsidised backloading would be remunerative, but in case rates had to be reduced to a losing scale to meet the competition of sea carriage, it was gravely proposed that the tariff from Westland to the east should be raised. The patriotism of Canterbury is indeed single-minded. The authors of this amazing proposal— the principal commercial organisations in Christchurchentirely overlook the fact that the present tariff does not pay in the South Island, so that, in view of tho enormous cost of the Otira tunnel, it is probable that there will be sufficiently heavy loss without' cutting rates. Without the tunnel section, the railways of the South Island involve an interest charge of £429 a mile; last year, the net earnings of the system were £171 a mile. The contrast is largely due to the success with which the competition of shipping has been used to secure differential rates on the railways, so that while the gross returns from goods traffic in the North Island averaged 15s 6d a ton last year the South Island had its goods carried for 9s Id a ton. It is hardly surprising that both Mr. Coates and Mr. McVilly bluntly rejected the proposal.