RAILWAY CONTROL,

Taranaki Daily News, 20 June 1930, Page 8

RAILWAY CONTROL,

Now that the terms under which the Railway Commission is to conduct its inquiry have been made public it is obvious that upon their interpretation will depend the value of the report. The Prime Minister has stated that the commission is not set up as a reflection upon the internal management of -the railways, but is to inquire into matters of policy outside the authority of the controlling officers. The commission’s instructions ar© by no means definite. If it finds, for instance, that the railways are over-manned, will this be laid to the charge of the management or be held to be one of the attributes of political control? If the general manager is satisfied that a drastic reduction could bo made in the staff provided the railways were treated solely as a commercial concern, would he be allowed to reduce it accordingly? So in regard to branch lines and. other traffic matters. It is all a question of what is to be considered policy and -what management, and unless the commission makes a very clear-cut finding on this question the outcome of its labour will be of doubtful benefit, lhe Leader of the Opposition, the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates, has announced that if he were in office the railways ) would be removed from political control and left to a board of official directors to manage, with the general manager as chairman. One seems to have some recollection of Mr. Coates as Minister of Railways condemning the board system of control root and branch, and what is more, committing the country to paying some considerable retiring allowances in order to pave the way for the appointment of a general manager. However, consistency is a virtue that may be overwrought, and it is possible that two years’ observation of one-man control of the railways has convinced Mr. Coates that his former conclusions were unsound. As a matter of fact the railways are now, to all intents and purposes, managed by an official board of directors. Though heads of departments do not sit in formal confeience as directors it is obvious that they must advise and consult_with the geneial manager on any questions of magnitude. Calling them directors will not increase their authority or efficiency. So far. as removing the railways from political control is concerned Mr. Coates has yet to explain how he would bring this about, The ideal is excellent. Its application is the difficulty. Even independent commissioners of railways would require to have the policy laid down by by the Ministry of the day, and in a publicly-owned undertaking there must be Parliamentary control in the long run. How to unite with that nonpolitical control of the working of the undertaking is the problem. It will bo interesting io see whether the newlyappointed commission will feel that it is part of its duty to seek a solution.