THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS MONDAY, OCTOBER 31, 1927. BOUNDARIES AND TRANSPORT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19781, 31 October 1927, Page 8

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS MONDAY, OCTOBER 31, 1927. BOUNDARIES AND TRANSPORT.

The result of the Mount Roskill poll on the proposal to amalgamate with the city is not one to fill either side with elation. So small was the margin of votes against the proposal that opponents must recognise, in spite of their victory, how strong is the desire for amalgamation. A transfer of twenty votes would have produced a verdict the other way. They must be aware also that the temper of the district, plunged into this controversy so soon after a decision to adopt rating on unimproved value, was unfavourablp to the amalgamation proposal. This issue became involved in the new proposal's discussion, and hampered its consideration on its own merits. In other circumstances, the result might have been very different. Nor can the advocates of amalgamation draw much satisfaction from the fact that the transfer of a mere score of votes would have given them success. It is not desirable that so critical an issue should be affirmatively decided by a small margin of opinion: a victory by a handful of v6tes would have been little, if any, better than a defeat. On general principles it may be regretted that the proposal was outvoted ; but, as the district was not ready to welcome it with any enthusiasm, its rejection may, in the circumstances, be regarded with equanimity. The issue will some day be raised again, untrammelled by other considerations, and then probably other counsels will prevail. In the meantime, although administratively separate, Mount Roskill is nevertheless a part of that nebulous Greater Auckland which is surely taking shape and cohesion as an administrative unit, and its prosperity is the wish of every citizen of the isthmus. In the prospective development of every region within the extensive area commonly known as Auckland there are certain public services that must eventually be under unified control. One of these —that of transport—has had specific mention in relation to the proposal rejected by the Mount Roskill district. Electing to remain independent of the city, that district must continue to shoulder its own responsibility in this. Had it cast in its lot with the city, it could have looked to the City Council to make provision for its ne,ed. Now its own Road Board must do the best it can. From the City Council's point of view, the poll's result may be welcomed as one relieving it of a possible additional responsibility. Already the council is under obligations in connection with tramway transport that are very heavy, and ratepayers have reason to view with caution, if not anxiety, all projects of extension. There was ample justification for their refusal to sanction the comprehensive loan proposal recently submitted, for it was made without assurance of financial soundness. What happened at last meeting of the council, when only the Mayor's casting vote succeeded in sending to the Finance Committee, for requisite scrutiny, a fresh loan proposal for tramways extension, confirms the impression that many members of the council are prone to propound or support schemes without giving them due consideration in all their financial bearings. This is a tendency calling for sharp criticism. No scheme should be put to the ratepayers until the council itself sees financial daylight. To acknowledge an obligation to provide adequate transport within the city's bounds is one thing; to see to it that this obligation is undertaken on a sound financial basis *is another—but it is iust as binding. Ratepayers, it may be presumed, will sanction all schemes proved to be soundly based, but they cannot be expected to approve loan proposals, however persuasively advocated on vague general principles, that are not clearly and fully shown to be so based. It may be that the hope of getting tramway facilities was reasonably held by many Mount Roskill electors voting for amalgamation. Yet it ought to be taken as axiomatic that such facilities should not be provided save on a business footing. A case in point is the project of a tramway extension to Avondale. This extension is rightly under consideration as a possible method of discharging the City Council's obligation to Drovide adequate transport within its bounds, recently increased by Avondale's joining the city, but it does not necessarily follow that this particular project is the only or the best means of meeting Avondale's need. The manager of the tramways department is understood to say that this exten-

sion will be at once a paying proposition. One statement in his report, however, calls for cautionary comment. He knows, as others know, that the Railway Department has arrangements in hand for a shortening of its line between the city and Avondale, with a probable electrification of that line; but he anticipates that, ere this can be done, the habit of travelling by tram will have become so established among residents and visitors of Avondale that they will continue to patronise the tram in preference to the train. The weakness of this naive statement is obvious. It implies that, to some extent at least, the Railways Department will not profit from its enterprise to the full extent of its expectation, and suggests an entire lack of co-ordination between the civic and the Government projects of transpoi't. On broad grounds of public policy it is desirable that some measure of co-ordination, l-ather than cut-throat competition, should obtain; and the council's duty, apart from the necessity to discount a sanguine prophecy wherein the wish is father to the thought, is to be in close consultative touch with the "Railways Department. The financial prospects of its Avondale extension cannot be accurately gauged without that.