RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20867, 6 November 1929, Page 10

RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION

THE GOVERNMENT’S POIiCY

OPPOSED BY REFORM PARTY.

SEARCHING INVESTIGATION

URGED,

(Froji Our Parliamentary Reporter.)

WELLINGTON, November 5. T i j ? r r °P° sed construction of the South Island Main Trunk railway was the subject of a lively debate in the House tonight. when the Railways Authorisation _ came on for its second reading. Moving the second reading of the measure, the Minister of Public Works (Mr E. A. Ransom) said he did not propose to take up much time discussing the railways, as that question had been dealt with very fully only recently. It had been suggested that further reports should be obtained before proceeding with the projects outlined in the Bill, but he 'wished to point out that the commission which investigated the South Island Main Trunk cost the country something like £IO,OOO. and that its report was still available, the cost of construction having varied little, if any,, since that time. It was safe to suggest that the country the proposed railway would serve had increased in value during recent years. It was most essential that the gaps should be filled up. The present railway system would be altogether inadequate until that had been done. By the completion of those lines not only would the productivity of, the country -be increased, but the existing services would be in a much better revenue position than they were at the present time. It had been suggested that the Government’s programme was in excess of the requirements of the country. At the present time heavy revenue losses were b?ing made on unfinished lines. The country was also faced with the problem of unemployment, and surely under such ednditions there was no time more opportune for proceeding with the work than the present. * Mr D. Jones (Reform member for MidCanterbury) ; Why did you stop Taupo? The Minister: I am referring only-to railways for which authorisation is sought. The'Minister said that the Bill sought authorisation first for the WellingtonNapier (Lower Hutt Valley duplication) line. , This was a branch line leaving the existing Lower Hutt Valley railway and running generally to the southward of the existing line to Point Howard. The length was about two miles 30 chains. The line, would penetrate what was known as the industrial area of the valley. Already many industries had been established in the district, and there were prospects of more being established shortly. The second , item in the Bill sought , authorisation for the midland line, 28 miles of which remained to be completed. The third section was the. South Island Main Trunk, which was estimated to cost £415,000. There was a gap of 26 miles. Twenty-two miles had already been authorised, and the work on that section had been expedited considerably during recent months. The distance from the Clarence River to Parnassus was 54 miles, and the Bill proposed to authorise that section. The other item was the east coast Main Trunk. There were other sections which required consideration. For instance, there was the Paeroa-Pokeno railway, to which authorisation had already been given. It was proposed, however, to place £SOOO on the Suppdementary Estimates to enable a thorough survey to be made of the Pae<-roa-Pokeno railway. The Minister said that when those lines had beer, finished the advantages to be obtained would far exceed the present losses on the railway system. It would not be long , before those lines would be paying not only interest charges, but also running costs. Referring to the South Island Main Trunk, the Minister said that its completion would mean a great deal to the farmers, who would have the advantage of the Addington market, and would also be brought into closer communication with Wellington. The Minister added .there was also the tourist aspect to be taken into consideration. With the railway from Auckland to Bluff, the tourist possibilities would be increased considerably, and that was a point which should not be overlooked..

Renewing his former pleas that a full investigation should be made into the financial side of the works on the Government’s railway construction programme, the Leader of the Opposition {Mr J. G. Coates) moved an amendment as follows: “ That while the House does not desire to obstruct the authorisation proposed in this Bill, it is of opinion that a full inquiry should immediately be instituted by the Government as to the whole question of railway construction, more especially in view of the emphatic statement in the Budget that the railway losses must rapidly increase unless some coordination is arranged between motor transport and the railways.” It was declared by the Acting-Leader of the House (Mr G. W. Forbes) that the carrying of the amendment would mean the holding up of all railway works now in progress and the consequent dismissal of the men so employed, but that assertion was denied by Mr Coates, who considered the investigation sought for could be completed in six months. Speaking immediately after the Minister of Public Works had moved the second reading of the Bill, Mr Coates said he had listened with interest and a certain amount of amusement to Mr Ransom’s speech. Mr Ransom had said that a commission which had cost £IO,OOO had been brought to New Zealand to inquire into the South Island Main Trunk railway. Mr Ransom would find that commission had not recommended, the railway. It did say the project was worth looking into if the train ferry were taken into consideration.

Mr E. F. Healy (Government member for Wairau): It was the only line recommended. A Reform voice: Bunkum. Mr Speaker: Order.

“Is it a fair thing for the Minister to say that the commission came here at a cost of £IO,OOO to inquire into the South Island Main Trunk railway when he must know the commission came to inquire into the operating railways? ” asked Mr Contes, “It is true that while here the commission passed an opinion on the train ferry idea,” Jesting reference was made by Mr Coates to the suggestion of the Minister that the rolling stock now said to be lying idle at various stations should bp used for the tourist traffic. As a matter of fact there was no idle stock and the rolling stock would not be brought up to the standard required for another five years.

Mr F. Lye (Government member for Waikato): It is a legacy you left. Mr Coates: -The lion, gentleman is a friend of mine so I will not reply to that interjection.

Continuing, Mr Coates said it seemed very desirable to him that employment should be found for those out of work on undertakings that would be likely to be of ultimate use to the country, but the question was whether Mr Ransom was really satisfied that the railways under construction were works that would be of ultimate benefit. Mr Coates made it clear that he was not singling out any particular line—it was at the whole question of railway construction that tbe criticism of the Opposition had been levelled. Mr Ransom had said that he (Mr Coates) had promised during the election campaign that the South Island Main Trunk line would be completed. Mr Coates recalled what had been alleged about him in connection with the Vails letter and the balloon loop. “ Here we have another allegation,” said Mr Coates. “ Everv Minister has repeated it in parrot fashion. It was said that I sent a telegram promising the completion of the line. I deny that I sent a telegram. No one has seen it. The ex-member for Wairau denied the story, and I have challenged the Government to produce the telegram. I do not want the Minister of Public Works to make charge* for which there is no foundation. I do not want him to join the happy band of those who misrepresent.”

Continuing, Mr Coates said the Reform Government had arranged the railway construction programme in an order of urgency, but now all the railways were being constructed at once. Mr A. M. Samuel (Reform member for Thames): Except the Paeroa-Pokcno line, Mr Coates; Well, you are getting £SOOO for that now.

Mr Samuel: For a resurvey. “ I do not think the Minister of Public

Works agrees with the Government’s railways policy/’ said Mr Coates. “ I thought U 8 fipoke with his tongue in his cheek, and did not believe in what ho was asking the House to agree to.” It was pointed out by Mr Coates that at least £15,000,000 would be required to complete the railways proposed. When the expenditure of such a sum was contemplated the time had arrived for a careful examination of what the consequences ,of that expenditure would be. The main object of the Opposition had been to urge for an inquiry, not to prevent the works going on. Some dispute had arisen as to the results of the investigations made into the South Island Main Trunk line, but surely that dispute could easily be settled. Indeed, he (Mr Coates) believed more could be said in favour of that line than in favour of some other lines on the Government’s programme. It had also to be considered whether a road in some cases would not be better than a railway. The question of all the railways should be submitted to the strictest examination by competent men, and there were such men in New Zealand capable of performing the task. Mr G. C. Munns (Government member for Roskill): Would you stop the present work? Mr Coates: No. it is not our intention to stop these authorisations, but we should at least .have a very careful and searching inquiry made into the operating costs, the revenue likely to be earned, and the developmental value.

Mr Munns: But would you stop the works in progress? Mr Coates: No, I think the. investigation could be carried out in 12 months or even in six months.

Continuing, Mr Coates said he did not think any exception could be taken to the Inangahua-Westport line, as there was a big coal trade there, but could anyone justify the Midland line at the present time? Ordinary caution should cause the Government to wait a while and see what would happen instead of driving right on through the heart of the country which had just experienced one of the worst earthquakes in recent years. It was contended by Mr Coates that the Minister had not been frank with the House, as, he had access to figures bearing on the railway works of which the House should be, placed in possession. “If carried, this amendment will mean the end of the- Railways Authorisation Bill," declared the Acting-Leader of the House (Mr G. W. Forbes). “While the Leader of the Opposition says he has no desire to hold up the authorisation of these lines, he must realise that if his amendment is carried these lines cannot be authorised this session.” Mr Coates: That is not so. “The Leader of the Opposition reminds me of a Daniel come to judgment,” said Mr Forbes. “These are works he bad in operation when he was Minister of Public Works and when he was Prime Minister, and we were assured then that the fullest investigation had been made into all of them. Now the Leader of the Opposition is in opposition he has suddenly developed the idea that we should make the investigations all over again. If this amendment is carried it will mean that all work on these lines must cease, and all the men be discharged. The •i?? °* 1G ra^wa y works of the country will have to come to a standstill. It w not as if , the amendment refers only to one line, it'refera to all lines under construction, but the only line the Leader of the Opposition can bave in his mini is the South Island Main Trunk. He says that has not been investigated. i am thoroughly convinced as far as the triink lines are concerned it is a sound business policy to complete them.” Air Forbes then set out to make a case for the South Island Main Trunk line. Hu referred to the- convincing case made out by , the recent South Island deputation which bad waited on members.of Parliameht in Wellington, and particularly to the speech of Air j. E. Strachan, who had sjoken on behalf of the Canterbury Progress League. A Reform member: Was he the one who spoke for an hour? The Canterbury Progress League had sent a delegation through the country that would be served by the line, and a comprehensive report had been brought down. Recently -another investigation had taken place, and a deputation representing the Canterbury Progress League, the Otago Expansion League, and the Southland League was received. A ‘ Hamilton (Reform member for Wallace): No.

Air Forbes: Well, the Southland League sent up its support for the line. I am informed that the Otago president represented Southland.

Discussing the prospective traffic over the proposed line, Mr Forbes said some contended that tho present ferry service between Wellington and Lyttelton would continue to be used, but, as a speaker at the deputation had pointed out, the experience of other countries was that people preferred to stay in the land vehicle as long as possible before taking a steamer, and consequently the lines were pushed out as far as possible to the end of the land. It was only reasonable to suppose that the same disposition would be evinced by people travelling in New Zealand.

Mr, R. Semple (Labour member for Wellington East); What area of useful land does the line traverse?

Mr Forbes; I have not the figures by me now as I did not intend to speak until the amendment was moved, but the facts can be given by other speakers. Advancing further arguments in support of the line, Mr Forbes referred to the deterioration in the condition that resulted from driving stock from Marlborough to Canterbury. In any case it was now virtually impossible to drive stock along the frequented roads. The completion of the railway would facilitate the transportation of the thousands of store sheep that were sent from Marlborough to Canterbury. Marlborough had a claim for the railway which had been promised many years ago. Mr Forbes expressed himself as quite confident that the line would bo of great assistance, particularly. iu the development of Marlborough, which had been handicapped because it had not got the communication to which it was entitled. The time had come when the linking up of the two provinces should be accomplished. Mr D. G. Sullivan (Labour member for Avon) asked whether during the election campaign Mr Coates had made statements about going on with the line. Mr Coates had denied _ that he bad sent a telegram on the subject to the late member for Wairau (Mr W. J. Girling), but would the Opposition Leader say whether or not he was sheltering behind the word “telegram?” The people in the district had been led to believe that M; Coates said that the South Island Main Trunk line would be gone on with as soon as the Westport-Inangahua section was finished. “It appears to me that the people are at present being misled about the line,” said Mr C. A. Wilkinson (Independent member for Egmont), who asked Mr Forbes whether his statement about the passing of the amendment would stop work on all lines in New Zealand. If it were correct the men were working on the , lines at present without authority. In regard to the South Island Main Trunk line there had been no recommendation in tlvs Fay-Raven report on the line alone, but in conjunction with them a train ferry. The only real report on the line was that of the Fay-Casey Commission, which had condemned it lock, stock, and barrel. It was the business of the Government to make a searching investigation before a large expenditure on railways was embarked upon. Mr Wilkinson, who said he would have the greatest pleasure in voting for the amendment, expressed the opinion that the South Island was the graveyard of the railway system, and he pointed out that the construction of the South Island line would involve greater losses than would have in combination resuited from tbe construction of the Palmerston North deviation and the line between Rotorua and Tauno. It was wrong constitutionally to epenil on a line money that had not been specifically authorised by Parliament, and fie would shed his responsibility for it with his vote. The general position of the railways was unsatisfactory. The annual loss was increasing as foreshadowed by the Budget of a Government which was proposing to expend still more money on railways. Surely it was reasonable to ask that a full inquiry should be made before the conof the South Island line was completed.

(Per United Press Association.)

WELLINGTON, November 5

Mr T. Makitanara (Government member for the Southern Maori seat) said that when _ it had been proposed to lay down the North Island main trunk railway it had been urged that the line would not pay axle grease, but who would say to-day the line was not paying its way. Mr R. A Wright (Wellington Suburbs) said it was very doubtful whether New Zealand could go on imposing taxation on tbe people to meet the cost of new railways. It had to be realised there was a limit to what the taxpayers could bear. Mr Wright added that there was no comparison between the South Island main

trunk railway and tie line from Wellington to Auckland, Mr W. E. Barnard (Napier) said he intended to support the amendment. He remarked that when he thought of the ‘ reckless plunging" of the Reform Government in railway expenditure he was amazed that it had been left to the Leader of the Opposition to move the amendment. Mr Barnard said he regarded the matter as a national one and not a party one.

The Minister of Labour (Mr W. A. Veitch) said it was not contemplated by the Government 'to spend £15,000,000 on new railway construction, but he contended that the Fay-Raven report had indicated that it would take nearly £13,000,000 to provide for the works contemplated by the Reform administration. Ihe Minister went on to quote extracts from the Fay-Raven report which he contended definitely showed that while they were not prepared to express an opinion ®. n u'Ljhe lines they did consider that the Ward-Parnassus gap should be bridged. Mr W. D. Stewart (Dunedin West) said there was a very wide divergence of public opinion as to the wisdom of extensive railway construction. He believed the Minister of Public Works, if allowed fime to consider the matter carefully, would realise the justice of the request that had been made by the Leader of the Opposition. It had not been put' forward merely to embarrass the Government. The United Party had stated its railway construction programme would not cost the taxpayer a penny, but it had not brought c?ai ev '^ ence to support that

Mr H. E. Holland (Duller) asserted that the effect of the amendment, if earned, must be to hold up the works. He could not _ imagine the Government continuing with the works while conducting an. investigation that might involve the prospect of the undertakings being dropped in six months time. Mr Holland insisted that roads could never be substituted for main lines. They could certainly be employed as feeders, but where it waa a case of stock being conveyed a long distance it _ was necessary to have some means of direct transport and only the railways could carry out this task satisfactorily. He appealed to all sections of the House not to allow parochial viewpoints to overshadow the national issues, It was beyond contradiction that when public works of value to the community could be undertaken, and when there were hundreds of men out of work, that it was a sound principle to employ those men on such tasks, especially as the best interests of the country would be served at the. same time. Mr C. H. Clinkard (Rotorua) said there were many people who would travel between different centres by rail, but who would not travel by sea. He supported the completion of the line from Picton to Christchurch. He added that he would be quite satisfied with the stoppage of tire Kotorua-laupo railway so lorn? as a firstclass road was provided in its stead. iw r , , F lctchc r (Grey Lynn) stated that he could not vote for the amendment, but he would not vote at all, ns he did not consider an accurate estimate of the cost of the South Island railway had been placed before the House? The debate was continued by other speakers.

Mr Coates’s amendment was defeated by 42 votes to 25.