SUBSIDY FOR THE MELBOURNESOUTH ISLAND SERVICE

Southland Times, Issue 23498, 3 May 1938, Page 5

SUBSIDY FOR THE MELBOURNESOUTH ISLAND SERVICE

To The Editor

Sir, —Now that the meeting of the South Islands Travel Association js over a few comments on the agitation for the resumption of a continuous passenger service between Melbourne and

South Island ports may not be amiss, as the Americans put it, to “debunk the bunkum.” To the average individual it is surely apparent that to expect Australian tourists to visit this district during the off season is too optimistic and that maintaining a high-class passenger vessel during this period, say six months, would cause an unreasonable economic loss. When all said and done, it is doubtful whether the passenger list would exceed a dozen, and in any case to induce tourists to visit these parts during winter would in the long run create a suggestion of disservice to the general issue. A subsidy of up to £60,000 has been mentioned to rehabilitate the Melbourne passenger service. After this sum is expended, what then? No doubt the Government will investigate the circumstances as previously and will not be stampeded into any foolish action over this. Existing uneconomic expenditure in this country is too high. There appears to be a woeful number of mis-statements as to the regularity of the service, passenger and cargo I have ascertained there has been a regular three-weekly service between Bluff and Melbourne by passenger and cargo vessel (the latter during the off season); consequently the suggestion that a regular passenger service would be conducive to increased trade in the way of freight is clearly a misapprehension. Then again it is reported that at the time the Manuka was lost two vessels - were engaged in the service and the subsidy was £36,000. I understand the Manuka carried on the service alone, being replaced by the Maheno, and there was no subsidy. It is reported further that large subsidies are given to assist the service between Wellington, Auckland and Sydney. This is another error, as I believe no subsidy is paid here. I suggest we can look for a more accurate summary of facts from a conference of business men. It is rather Gilbertian that the agitation should be bolstered up by representatives of harbour boards. I should imagine it would be fairer if these individuals maintained a neutral attitude where their clients’ business affairs are affected. As the above may be considered in the nature of destructive criticism, I suggest to travel associations that they should concentrate upon improving facilities and making resorts more attractive for summer tourists. There is an evident tendency to quibble whether tourists from abroad should come to the North Island or the South Island. The important factor is to induce them to come to New Zealand. Then, provided we have the “goods” in Southland, and I am sure we have, all will come right in the fullness of time.— Yours, etc., „ THE OTHER SIDE. May 2, 1938.