QUAY STREET RAILWAY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18843, 18 October 1924, Page 13

QUAY STREET RAILWAY.

jiff end OF THE CONTROVERSY, ift;PARTIES REACH AGREEMENT. |M§'. ' ggllj. STATE ACCEPTANCE URGED. V MINISTER AS FINAL ARBITER. All the principal local parties to the Quay Street railway controversy composed their differences of opinion on the project last evening and came to an amicable agreement concerning future safeguards for the travelling public. The question was threshed, winnowed and sifted on three occasions yesterday, first at a conference of representatives of the disputants in the afternoon; secondly, at a meeting of the Marine Boroughs' Association in the evening; and. finally, in conjunction with that meeting, at a conference with two representatives of the Auckland Harbour Board—the chairman, Mr. H. R. Mackenzie, and Mr. «T. Henderson, as representing the North Shore Boroughs on the board. , The hP'-vest, as it were, was a frank acceptance of the tentative agreement, with certain amendments, already arrived at b>t a previous conference, and a combined de- j cision to ask the Government to substitute such agreement for the proposals promulgated in the House of Represents,tires. Several obscure features of th* controversy were discussed exhaustively at tho association meeting, which was presided over by tho Mayor of Devonport, Mr. T. Lament, and fully attended. A legal opinion on the draft agreement between | the board and the association was sub- * mitted by Mr. A. M. Gould. This, however, was taken in committee. Powers of the Tribunal. The main purpose of the discussion was to secure, if at all practicable, a clear definition of the. powers of the proposed special tribunal which is to sit. sir months after the initial, operation of the Quay Street railway and consider what safeguards, if any, may be required for the protection of ferry passengers. Was the tribunal to sit once only and deliver "ne decision, or was it to have power if' sit from time to time and require safeguards as conditions altered ? The draft Agreement made provision for one conference only, after which the tribunal would go out of existence. This was interpreted as disadvantageous to tho North Shore public in the matter of seeking future safeguards, if and when conditions altered. Another obscurity concerned the right of appeal. Was it to be a general right or the right only of the minority ? Then to whom would an appeal have to be made ?to the Harbour Board, to the City Council, or to the Government?

There appeared to be present all the elements for an interminable controversy, but when Mr. Mackenzie and his colleague Attended the association's meeting, which assumed the character of a conference, ail the difficulties, real or imaginary, rapidly dissolved. Assurance Made Doubly Sure. The chairman informed Mr. Mackenzie that there was in reality very few points of difference between the association and the board. The association had decided to ask that provision be made for the tribunal or special conference as proposed for six m<>nths after the opening of the railway, having power to sit, from time to time, if necessity arose for further consideration of safeguards.. Mr. Mackenzie said the board was quite definite on the matter, and desired to have the question settled as one big issue. Otherwise the conference would become interminable. Mr. E. Aldridge suggested that the proposed conference might meet at intervals ©i not less than a year if conditions as to railway traffic, growth of population, and so on seriously altered. Mr. Mackenzie and Mr. Henderson accepted the suggestion with a proviso that tha prospective conditions were defined and made applicable to traffic and complications other than for the board's waterfront purposes. Members had mentioned. for example, that some day a waterfront railway would cross the harbour. A resolution, embodying the wishes of both parties, was drafted and carried. , In the course of discussion on other points, Mr- Mackenzie explained that the Railway Department would run the traffic on the. Quay Street line for several years at least, but the board intended in future to make provision for running all the waterfront railway traffic with its own plant. But that could not be for some time yet Immediate Legislation.

Finally, it was agreed that the chairman (the Mayor of Auckland) of the special conference of eight members to consider safeguards, be given a casting vote, also that the minority right of appeal to the Minister for Public Works be accepted; and that the agreement, as amended and accepted by both parties, be embodied in legislation, to be passed this Parliamentary sesfcicn, so that the terms of the agreement might he made valid and binding. It was further resolved to inform the Government as to the decision of the conference, and respectfully to request the Government to substitute the agreement between the board and the association for the Parliamentary proposal, that a special tribunal be held just before the opening of the Quay Street railway to Consider safeguards. Before retiring from the meeting, Mr. Mackenzie assured its members that he was acting for the board, and that the hoard would do the right thing, when necessary, without hesitation. Reference was made by the association to the excellent services rendered by Mr. A. Harris, M.P., in the matter, and it was resolved to record its high appreciation of his energetic work.