LYTTELTON HARBOUR.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume VII, Issue 2027, 13 August 1920, Page 6

LYTTELTON HARBOUR.

FUNDS FOR DEVELOPMENT. BILL BEFORE PARLIAMENT. [From Our Own Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON August 12. This afternoon the House of Representatives authorised the Lyttelton Harbour Board to borrow a further £150,000 for development works. That is the effect of the Lyttelton Harbour Board Loan Bill, which was passed without opposition. As member for the district, Mr J. McCombs was in charge of the Bill, which was briefly debated in committee. Dr H. T. J. Thacker (Christchurch East) gave the House to understand that the Lyttelton Harbour Board's difficulties began in 1877, when the Railway Department took over control of the wharves, and that many of the present difficulties at Lyttelton were due to the want of progress exhibited by the Railway Department. The time had now come when they must be emancipated, so far as Lyttelton was concerned. The Bill proposed borrowing for the purchase of the installation of electric cranes and capstains. The capstans would be provided by the Lyttelton Harbour Board, and worked by the Railway Department. In those circumstances, they should really be provided by the Railway Department, but the Government was like a skilful footballer—all the time shouldering and pushing off Christchurch and Canterbury, although the province had paid cash into the Treasury in addition to handing over its public works, including the tunnel, when the General Government took over in 1877. So far as the Christchurch-Lyttelton railway was concerned, the Government had done nothing, and, with regard to the poor facilities at the port, it was all the time putting the* onus on the Harbour Board. Canterbury had not had a fair deal from the time that she gave over her provincial railways to the General Government. She had never received interest for the money which she handed over then, and as for the port of Lyttelton, it was slowly and surely becoming side-tracked. The big overseas boats were missing it and transhipping their cargoes at Wellington. Of course, that was to the advantage of Wellington every time. He asked the Government to take some interest in the provision of railway facilities at Lyttelton. The Hon. W. Nosworthy (Minister of Agriculture) asked how Dr Thacker reconciled his support of the Bill with his strong Port Christchurch views. Dr Thacker: If the hon. member were starving near my house, I would give him a meal. Mr Nosworthy said that when money was available the Government was prepared to duplicate the tunnel, and to provide better facilities at Lyttelton. Meanwhile, there was a shortage of labour, and also of materials. The hon. member for Christchurch East always backed V up Port Christchurch, yet now he sat quietly by and said that this Bill must go through. Of course it must, but where was the hon. member's consistency. Previously he had had nothing but criticism for Lyttelton —it seemed that he had one foot in the canal scheme and the other in Lvttelton Harbour.

Mr E. J. Howard (Christchurch South) said that he believed in Port Christchurch, and hoped that the next generation would build it, but,, in the meantime, the harbour was so bad that they must spend some money on it, in order to get some ships into Lyttelton. Mr R. A. Wright (Wellington South) said that the question of whether a harbour board should over-borrow was a serious one. Was Lvttelton Harbour silting up? 'Mr Howard: No! The ships are getting bigger 1 Mr Wright expressed the opinion that some answer should be Riven to Dr Thacker's criticism of the Bill. Was the Lyttelton Harbour Board financially sound? Mr J. McCombs (Lyttelton) said that no Canterbury member was opposing the Bill. He thought that there was very much to be said in favour of the Railway Department providing the electric capstans, but they were necessary, and if the department would not provide them, the board must. Lyttelton had berthed H.M.S. Renown, with the present depth of water, and would be able to berth still larger ships after this money was expended on deepening. Dr Thacker said that, as far as Lyttelton was concerned, if he could have a committee of the House to consider the whole question, he knew which side of the hill would be recommended for the harbour—but Lyttelton was the port at present, and must receive attention. The Bill was reported without amendment, read a third time, and passed.