RAILWAY DUPLICATION

Otago Witness, Issue 3525, 4 October 1921, Page 42

RAILWAY DUPLICATION

DUXEDIX'-RAVE-XSBOURXE LIX’E. (From Our Own Correspondent.) T ELLIXGTOX, September 28 Replying to Mr T. K. Sidey’s question regarding the duplication of the railway between .Dunedin and Ravensbourne, the Minister of Railways said the position was that in September, 1912, the department entered into an agreement with the Otago Harbour Board under which the Harbour Board was to give facilities for such deviation by providing- all the land that was necessary for the diversion of the existing railway lines and sidings; to extend the sea wall as required for the protection of the deviated railway; to reclaim the land required for such deviation, and do all other necessary formation work ready for the laving of the rails; to make with the City Council all arrangements necessary in connection with street formation, etc.; settle all claims for compensation in respect to existing tenancies of the Harbour Board which might he interfered with; and, further. to remove rock from a portion of land at Black Jack’s Point to admit of the proposed deviation and railway at that point. The department agreed to acquire the land at Black Jack’s Point, and, on completion by the Harbour Board of the whole of ibe works and arrangements for which tiie board was to divert the railway from the present to the deviated alignment agreed upon. The present, position is that the Harbour Board has not yet carried out the works to be undertaken by it, and until it does so the Kailway Department can do nothing in the matter. From the point of view of railway utility there is no immediate necessity for the' undertaking of the work. Mr 15. Kellett also complained of the answer to the question, and said the Government had no policy in regard to unemployment. Mr C. iv Statham said the Government was largely to blame for the amount of unemployment there was at the present time, and the Government could do a great deal to relieve it. In regard to tin's railway. he held that if the Government had been sympathetic and earnest they could have co-operated with the Harbour Board and have got the work done. It would give employment to married men in the city instead of sending them into the country at 12s a day, upon which they could not keep their families.