THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS FRIDAY, JANUARY 9, 1931. TRANSPORT PROBLEMS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20767, 9 January 1931, Page 10

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS FRIDAY, JANUARY 9, 1931. TRANSPORT PROBLEMS.

The Gisborne deputation which visited Wellington to protest against work being stopped on the railway in which its members were interested were told more than that the decision of Cabinet could not be altered. They were told that, certainly, but the acting-Prime Minister, in his reply, also suggested, in a tentative way, that further action affecting transport, development and finance was contemplated. Most of the general observations made hinged 011 the explanation that work on the railway had been suspended, not abandoned, "in order that the Government might have a breathing space in which to go into the whole question." With this made clear, one phase of what Cabinet decided becomes more conspicuous than ever. To cease operations on all railway construction work which was not so near completion as to demand it for the sake of the capital already sunk would be a logical and quite an understandable move. This is how the Gisborne-Waikokopu line and the Xawatiri-Inangahua section of the Midland line have been treated: which makes all the more glaringly noticeable the fact that the Wharanui-Parnassus section of the South Island Main Trunk railway has not been given equal treatment, that, in fact, the determination to proceed with it has been reiterated. Everything Mr. Ransom said about the position of the railways applies as forcibly to the South Island line as to the Gisborne or the Midland. Mr. Veitch answered estimates of revenue by saying that the cost of earning revenue last year was 91.68 per cent, of the gross revenue. Yet the Government has issued an official estimate for the South Island line, promising an annual loss of £IOO,OOO, in which the cost of earning revenue is shown as just over 63 per cent, of that revenue. A case cannot be made for suspending other works without making at least an equal case —in some respects a stronger one—against this South Island Main Trunk project. Apart from the fatal flaw of its inconsistency in application, the acting-Prime Minister's statement contains much that can be endorsed. It is perhaps not much use emphasising how complete a reversal of the policy on which the United Party fought the last election it contains. Every claim made that rapid railway construction would be the financial salvation of the country is definitely and irrevocably shattered by what Mr. Ransom said in Wellington on Wednesday ; nor can it be proved that conditions have altered since 1928 sufficiently to mean that those claims were justified then. The same factors as those quoted now were operating. United Party was warned that it was making illusory promises. It took no heed. Now it has recanted almost everything it affirmed a little more than two years ago; almost everything, but not quite all. Only the promise to close the gap in the South Island line remains, though the claim that it can be done "without costing the taxpayer a shilling" is no longer sustained. However, as already said, there is not much to be gained by dwelling too long now upon those circumstances. Mr. Ransom touched upon one of the outstanding features of the position when he remarked that the roads, constructed with public money, were the means of encouraging intensified competition with the railways owned by the public. It is true that so far as road competition is responsible for railway losses, the public, which must make those losses good, pays for transport twice over. It is equally true that public appreciation of this undoubted fact is, generally, quite insufficient. Only where lack of patronage has caused the suspension of railway services, or a threat of suspension, has there been any sign of an awakening. Mr. Ransom wishes to impress these facts on the people, but there is no guarantee he will succeed any better than others who have tried.

The acting-Prime Minister advocates a comprehensive review of the whole transport position with a view to getting a correct perspective on all the issues involved. This is very desirable, though, bearing in mind his party's previous policy now being reversed, it seems belated. But from some of the other things he said, he and his party still have some illusions that should be dissipated. He speaks, for instance, of restrictions that would force traffic on to the railways. This is a very difficult expedient to contemplate. In the first place, all recent official statements declare, and doubtless with good reason, that, passenger revenue being the principal department where ground has been lost, the privately-owned motor-car is the worst competitor of the railway. Row restrictions against its use are to be enforced is a question not yet answered. The comprehensive review of transport to deserve the name must include the question of railway management, especially that of emancipating it from the political control which has demonstrably exercised a harmful effect for many years. It has been urged on the Government officially and unofficially, but no adequate response has yet been forthcoming. But, dominating all other questions is that of avoiding further capital expenditure which cannot pass the test of complete soundness. The Cabinet decision Mr. Ransom has been defending is a step in the right direction. Its main fault is that it has not been either complete or consistent. If the Government makes it so. the way will be cleared for that reconsideration of the whole transport position which present conditions endorse without any other justification being needed.