EAST COAST RAILWAY.

Pahiatua Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 13169, 30 January 1936, Page 5

EAST COAST RAILWAY.

BOARD HAD APPROVED.

NO COMPETITION WANTED. Electric. Telegraph—Press Association WELLINGTON, January 29. One of the earliest results of the changed GovtJument wa-s an assurance to the Napier and Gisborne districts that their abandoned railway would be completed anil operated by the State. According vo Ministerial statements, if the Railway Board made objections it would not be allowed to stand in the way. In fact Hon. It. Semple used the novel metaphor of “running shoes being required for its members.” Until the existing legislation Is amended, as will undoubtedly be the ease during the coming session, the Railway Board had the sole decision in the matter, unless its recommendation that the railway const-ruction be stopped is reversed by resolutions of both branches of the Legislature.

In the light oi this position a surprising fact has been revealed. This is, that prior to the general election the former Coalition Government was in possession of a report from the Railway Board recommending the comjiletion of the Napier-Gis-borne line. No public announcement was made in this complete change of front by the beard, which had previously reported in no uncertain way that the line would not pay for operating expenses. What influenced the former Government to maintain its reticence on this important question? The reason so far a.s can be ascertained, is that there was a qualification attached to the effect- that the approval was contingent oil legislation being passed giving the new railway statutory lights to a large proportion of the traffic over the route. This involved a change m transport policy, and the only indication of the former Government’s activity in this con-neqtK-on was its promise that the transport system would be investigated with a view to securing further co-ordination. One of th*? first acts of the new Minister of Transport (Mr Semple) was to arrange for a general conference of transport interests as a preliminary to legislation on the question. and this morning he is meeting a number of State departmental heads concerned in the transport problem to discuss the future lines

.There is no doubt that the present Government will adopt it policy to protect developmental railways against- other forms of transport competition, therefore the Railway Board’s attitude in relation to the Xapier-Gisborne line practically squares with that of the Labour Ministry.

There has been a suggestion that the. Railway Board would be equally favourable to the completion of the South Island main trunk line on the same terms, though this report has not been so easily capable of confirmation a.s that relating to the Gisborne railway.

EX-PREMIER EXPLAINS. CHRISTCHURCH. Last Night. The offer of the Railways Board to withdraw its objection to the completion of the Napier-Gisborne line was made to the Coalition Government only on condition that all the district traffic was secured for the line. The former Minister (Mr Forbes) said to-day. commenting on the report from "Wellington, that a secret and favourable report from the board to the previous Government had now been revealed The position was under consideration when the general election was held. No decision had then been reached and no public annum icemen t bad bevML made about th.e board’s recommendation. This condition imposed by the board would have meant driving from the road all motor service's at present operating.

Mr Forbes said he could not recall any recommendation which the board bad made about the South Island main trunk fine. “From what I remember the board offered to withdraw As objection to the completion of. the Xnpier-Gisborne line if the whole of the district traffic was secured for the line,” said Mr Forbes. “This would have required a good deal of legislation and in fact wouTd have meant legislating off the road those person* who we ri-

al ready running motor services. There would have been a different complexion cn tno matter if tinmotor services had not been established before the advent of the railway, but they were in active co-op-eration and legislation which would have the effect of driving them, altogether from the- road would naturally have required most careful consideration and no public announcement bad been made about the board’s recommendation.”