CANTERBURY’S HARBOUR.

Southland Times, Issue 20111, 23 February 1927, Page 9

CANTERBURY’S HARBOUR.

(An Open Letter.) The Right Hon. J. G. Coates, Prime Minister, Wellington. Sir, —The late Mr Massey affirmed the right of Canterbury to have access to and control of its chief port, Lyttelton. We venture to appeal to you to reaffirm your late leader’s statement and to grant to Christchurch and Lyttelton that freedom and control which, since the beginning the inalienable right of Auckland and Wellington, has made possible the latter cities wonderful expansion and progress for which we have feelings, not of provincial jealousy but of the utmost admiration. We base the whole of our arguments and our proposals on necessity and that great incentive to progress and to successful business—namely competition. To-day New Zealand more than ever before is facing keener rivalry in the successful marketing of her primary products—the chief assets of the Dominion. We, recognising this fact, and also the axiom, “With equal facilities for handling and with equal port charges the port with the widest choice of transportation facilities to the interior will be the greatest port,” design to provide Canterbury with a new and up-to-date trade route and a modern port by means of (1) a vehicular tunnel and a broad highway, and (2) a remodelled Lyttelton. Only thus can we obtain the best possible direct access to our markets and the expansion which the wealth of our province demands. We fully recognise that our proposals bring us into conflict with your Government’s present policy, but this conflict is friendly on our part and we maintain that with the expansion that will and can come in no other way the Lyttelton-Christchurch railway will benefit and not suffer from that rivalry. We claim to represent a considerable body of responsible opinion in this province and we submit that the time has now come for us to assist your Government to solve our transportation impasse which (in the presence of that once necessary but now indefensible monopoly, the Christ-church-Lyttelton railway, involving Government monopoly and control of transport to, from, and on our wharves) gravely retards our primary and secondary industries for which Canterbury is so admirably suited. We do not propose In this letter further to elaborate the details of our scheme or to reiterate our arguments in the interest of national economy against overhead electrification and in favour of Diesel traction and a modern ventilation system for the railway tunnel —these can be studied at your leisure in our publications since April 30 last. We are, however, pleased to note that lately in England and Canada you have investigated Diesel traction about which practically nothing authoritative was known in New Zealand in March last when you conferred with our local authorities and admitted that the responsibility was on your Government in deciding on the electrification scheme, a scheme which excellent though it may be in itself does nothing to remove the disabilities of our port. Now therefore that you are cognisant of this cheaper and just as efficacious a way of abolishing the smoke nuisance in our railway tunnel we venture to ask your consideration of our proposals involving the provision of modern terminal facilities at Lyttelton and an elastic transport system. With much respect we submit a tremendous principle is at stake in this matter, and it is this, that where a large body of the citizens of New Zealand can prove their urgent need and their ample means of fulfilling it, the Government is in the face of such facts in duty bound to recognise the right of such body to proceed to its fulfilment unless such proceeding is to the manifest detriment of the community as a whole. We bring no dictatorial bearing to this matter, but we bring a firm conviction, and it is with feelings of genuine and disinterested concern for not only the future but the necessitous present of our province that we confidently appeal to you to exercise a searching review of and just judgment concerning the serious state of our lines of communication between Christchurch and Lyttelton. We consider there is no matter of greater urgency to our province and we venture to ask the favour of an interview with you at an early and convenient date.

We have the honour to be, Sir, Yours obediently, THE PORT AND CITY COMMITTEE. Christchurch, February 19.