RAILWAY CONTROL

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22390, 9 April 1936, Page 13

RAILWAY CONTROL

. PASSAGE OF BILL NO UNDUE PROTEST INFORMATION ON PROJECTS MINISTER'S EXPLANATION [BY TELEGRAPH —SPECIAL REPORTER] WELLINGTON, Wednesday. No undue protest was raised by members of the Opposition against the passage of the Government Railways Amendment Bill through the House of Representatives this afternoon. Compared with the treatment of the Reserve Bank Amendment Bill, the committee stages were brief and the third reading was actually carried without a division.

In the committeo stages the Leader of the Opposition, lit. Hon. G. \V. Forbes, recalled the statement of the Minister that Parliament would be given full information before construction on any railway line would be commenced. "The Minister stated that he had asked the department for a report," added Mr. Forbes, " but no matter what the result of that report may be the line will still go on. If the department brought in an adverse report on any project in which the Government was committed up to the neck, as it is with the Gisborne and South Island Main Trunk lines, 1 should imagine that the head of that department would have a pretty uncomfortable time. ' The South Island Scheme "If an independent report was secured one could feel that there was no bias and that those presenting the report were actuated purely by the intrests of the country," Mr. Forbes concluded.

Mr. S. G. Smith (Opposition —New Plymouth) said he took it that the Minister would submit a report to Parliament, notwithstanding any special Act authorising construction. He asked whether it would be given to both Houses to concur or disagree with the Minister's report before construction was commenced.

The first Government member to speak on the bill, apart from the Minister, was Mr. E. P. Meachen (Wairau) who challenged a statement made by the Leader of the Opposition that the late Government had been prepared to go ahead with the South Island Main Trunk railway when the finance was available. Mr. • Meachen pointed out that the Government had removed large quantities of material from the railway site and had sold it at a trifling figure.

Other Opposition members spoke briefly against several clauses of the bill.

Reply by Minister

The Minister, Hon. D. G. Sullivan, said that full information about projected undertakings would be placed before the House, although it would not necessarily be given in the official form required under the 1931 legislation. The House was entitled to that information, and he was sure it would

get it. Some of the Opposition members appeared to thi&k that the railway organisations in future were to be shut off from the Minister, and that any difference of opinion over wages or conditions of employment must necessarily be dealt with through the process of a tribunal, continued Mr. Sullivan. That was incorrect. Exactly the same position would obtain in future as in the past. When any question arose the men would approach the Minister and the department in the usual way and it Was only at the point where it was found not possible to arrange for a complete agreement on all points that power was taken to set up a tribunal. , , The railwaymen would not be deprived. of any rights they had in the past, concluded Mr. Sullivan. The proposal had the approval of the mens organisations as well as of the Government. , , . - The bill was read a third time on the voices.