PUBLIC WORKS VOTES

Wanganui Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 160796, 2 November 1920, Page 7

PUBLIC WORKS VOTES

AUCKLAND’S BIG SHARK. MR VEITCH’S PROTEST. In the House on Friday, on the question; That the Speaker do leave the .chair in order that the House might go into Committee of Supply to consider the Public Works estimates, Mr Veltch said: Mr Speaker, I wish to draw attention to the situation that has developed in connection with the Public Works Estimates generally, and I am going to begin by saying that in my judgment the allocation of public moneys by the Minister of Public Works is not a fair allocation geographically. I do not think it can be proved to be a fair allocation from any point of view whatever, either from the point of vies? .of geography, population or otherwise. Of course, it has been argued and no doubt it will be so argued to-night, that owing to the fact the population of the Auckland province having increased considerably during the last few years, the Government is justified in expending larger sums of money in that district than in any other part of the Dominion. That may or may not be so, but my answer, to that argument is that the allocation of public moneys in Auckland to the detriment of the other parts of the Dominion is one. of the principal causes of the influx of population to that district. In other words, the men who desire to secure employment in the Public Works Department must go to Auckland to secure that employment. Therefore, the judgment I have formed from a careful analysis of the Public Works Statement is that a decidedly unfair allocation in favour of the Auckland province has been made by the Minister of Public Works. I shall begin with the figures in connection with the road districts, and I shall quote the figures very briefly. I find that in taking the northern part of the North Island, exclusive of Taranaki, w r hich really is not the entire northern half of the North Island, these figures obtain, that in the road districts of Whangarei, Auckland, Tauranga, Gisborne, and Taumarunui, the amount voted this year for road districts alone is £789,098. The total allocation for the year in this class is £1,641,779, leaving a balance of £852,681 for the rest of New Zealand. Those figures show quite clearly that nearly half the entire road construction vote for the Dominion of New Zealand is to be spent in those five road districts I have mentioned. Then taking the expenditure in the same class for last year, we find that the total expenditure was £376,097. The five districts I have already mentioned had £164,171 spent in them, leaving a balance of £211,956 for the remainder of New Zealand outside those five districts. So that there was not a very great deal more money spent in the remaining portion of New Zealand, including the whole of the South Island, than was spent in these five road districts in the Auckland province. Now, Sir, no figures can be quoted to justify such an unequal distribution of public moneys as these figures disclose, and I want to point out particularly that the amounts voted for. this year for these districts. are nearly one-half of the total vote for the DominionThen I come to the roads for land settlement class. The roads for land settlement class for these five districts represent on this year’s estimates a sum of £169,320, while the total vote for the whole of the Dominion is £250,905, leaving a balance for the remainder of New Zealand outside those five, districts of £81,585, so that t vehotse £81,585, so that the votes for roads for land settlement in the flye districts I have mentioned are twice the amount that is left for the whole, of New Zealand outside of those five districts—a most startling state of affairs. The amount spent last year over the whole Dominion was £60,692, and the amount spent in these five districts is £21,316, so that about 40 per cent, of the money for the whole of the Dominion was spent In these five districts. . I would like the Minister of Public Works to show to the House what is the justification for this enormous discrepancy in this year’s votes on these two particular items. I am going to suggest to the House that the Auckland district generally has a great deal more than a fair share of representation in the Ministry and is receiving a great deal more than its fair share of the expenditure on public works generally. I have not been able to find time to analyse the whole of the votes in the estimates. I have only dealt with these two particular classes, but I have not the slightest doubt that if I had analysed the whole of the estimates I would probably have found very much the same proportion as the figures I have quoted. Now, let' me point out the enormous influence that the Auckland district is exerting in this Parliament. Let us see to what extent the Auckland members control the expenditure on public works. We have the Rt.. Hon Mr Massey (Auckland District) holding the position of Prime Minister, Minister of Railways, Minister of Finance, Minister, of Mines, and a number of other departments which I need not mention." Then we have the Hon. Sir Wm. Herries (Auckland District) Minister of Nr tive Affairs, Minister of Labour, Minister of Customs and Marine, Minister in charge of Pensions and the National Provident Fund. We have

the Hon. Mr Coates (Auckland district) Minister of Public Works, Minister of Telegraphs, Minister in charge of the Public Trust, Public Buildings, Government Life and Accident Insurance Departments. The Hon- Mr Parr (Auckland district) Minister of. Education, Minister of Public Health, Hospitals and Mental Hospitals Department; so that the strength of the Auckland province in the Ministry to-day is that they control every one of the great spending Departments except those controlled by the Hon. Mr Guthrie, Minister of Lands. That hon. gentleman is also in charge of Land Settlement, Discharged Soldiers and Repatriation, but outide the Departments controlled by him I assert that all the Departments that have large spending powers are controlled from the Auckland district. In addition to that there are eight committees which have Auckland members as their chairmen. Mr Speaker is from Auckland, and the two Government whips are Auckland members. Now I think the balance of New Zealand is entitled to complain when the influence of the Auckland province is very much out of proportion to that oif any other part of the Dominion. And while I have acknowledged that the Hon. Mr Guthrie has control of several of the spending Departments, the fact remains that the figures I have given in connection with lands for sett’ement in the Dominion generally, show clearly that even the Departments controlled by the Hon. Mr Guthrie are spending a large proportion of their moneys in the Auckland province, particularly the Land for Settlements Road Branch. Now I want to discuss some of the requirements of some of the southern parts of the North Island, and of the Taranaki province. I want to shoAv where the influence of Auckland is operating unfairly to the detriment of the Taranaki, Wellington and Wanganui districts. The Paekakariki deviation is the bottleneck of the city of Wellington. The work of duplicating and improving the line between Paekakariki and Wellington is of the most urgent importance, and it is necessary for the benefit of the Napier line, the New Plymouth line and the Main Trunk line from Auckland. It is necessary for the purpose of facilitating the goods and passenger traffic from all of these lines that the Paekakariki duplication and deviation should be carried out at the earliest possible moment; but while we find that there are large sums of money on the estimates for the extension of the NoHh Auckland main line in three directions, there is £IOOO on the estimates in connection with the duplication of the line from Paekakariki. Then again for years we have been promised in Wanganui that some kind of survey would be made of the line we have been "agi \ L ing for for years, betAveen Raetihi and Wanganui- The Main Trunk line to Wanganui is becoming seriously congested on that part of the line between Marton and Wanganui, oaving to the heavy grades, and it is essential that something should be done to relieve the situation. But we find that nothing whatever is being done, not even to give a flying survey of the line we require from Raetihi to Wanganui, which would relieve the traffic on the main line, and if the Minister will look at the map he will see that the promise made years and years ago, and'repeated by Minister after Minister should have been carried out before this and should have been proylded for on this year’s estimates.. The .construction of that railway between Raetihi and Wanganui would extend Wanganui’s business area toAvards Auckland, and there we find the influence of the Auckland group preventing that work from being done. Then we come to Taranaki and find the same influence there. The Taranaki people want the main line completed betAveen Ongaruhe and Stratford in order to extend the business area of the New Plymouth harbour. I wish to take the opportunity of complimenting the New Plymouth people on the splendid success they have attained in the construction of the.deep sea harbour in their "district. “ But that deep sea harbour needs railway facilities Into the adjoining country. Oh, no. There are to be three parallel main lines in the narrow strip .of country lying north of Auckland, but the people of Taranaki cannot get their line finished, and yet the Minister of Public Works says that his policy is to concentrate on main lines. Why, his estimates are crammed full of branch lines in the Auckland province, and there is nothing like the progress being made that .ought to be made., to connect’* Taranaki Avith the Main Trunk line to give it a fair chance. It seems to me the expenditure of public money in this country has got into the hands of a group of men who are controlling the Government in their own interests to the detriment of the balance "bf the people of New Zealand. I put the matter to the Minister plainly in order that he may understand my attitude. Then let us look at the map that is attached to the Public Works Statement, and It will be found that in the northern part of North Auckland you are going to have a main line right through to the northern end. There is to be a connecting line from Eiriponui towards Dargaville, and on the map you see three parallel lines in that narrow strip in the north. Take another look and see Avhat it looks like in the southern part, and you will see three huge tracts of country, where there are no railways at all- Therefore, it is clear that some powerful influence is at work to throAv out of balance the proper and just allocation of these votes. Just a word about ' HYDRO-ELECTRICITY. When Sir Wm. Fraser was Minister of Public Works and Mr Parry was the hydro-electrical engineer of the Department, the latter laid down a scheme for the development of electrical power at Mangahao, which was to be divided between Wanganui, Palmerston North and Wellington. An Hon. Member: And Wairarapa. Mr Veitch: I saw the map in the Public Works Office and that map did not Include Wairarapa, and that is the map I am discussing. I am sure the intellectual member for Palmerston will back me up at the

finish. The map shown to me had a line indicating the power line across the three areas I have named. What do we find to-day? That, although the Minister’s predecessor promised me in this House, and it is recorded in Hansard, that Wanganui, Palmerston North and Wellington would receive a fair and equitable quota of the power from Mangahao, the hon. gentleman has gone back on that promise, on the pretext of a shortage of power from Mangahao. Since then the hon. gentleman has promised 2000 h.p. to Wairarapa, which is_ further away from the source mentioned than is Wanganui. That is the position I put to the Minister of Public Works, and I think it will take him all his time to clear the ground. I would not like to say that party influence is being brought to bear on this question, and there may be some planationAn Hon. Member: You should not suggest it.Mr Veitch: I am making the suggestion deliberately, but I am not making an asertion, because I have got no p7oof of ii. I am making the suggestion and it is for the Minister to clear it up. He has not yet made an explanation of the position. I' Avish to point out to him that the Wanganui peop'e were led to believe that they were going to get that hydro-electric power, and I Avould remind him that Wanganui is more urgently in need of that poAver tnan any other part of the Dominion. I have brought this matter forward from time to time and I have never had a satisfactory reason Avhy this change has been made* Our trams have been stopped for months for the want of potver oaving to misfortune. That Is not the fault of the Minister of Public Works, but it is surely a good reason why he should give at least equal consideration to our requirements to that he has given to the requirements of other portions of this country. The hon. gentleman says that when the Waikaremoana scheme is carried out he Avill then be in a position to give Wanganui poAver. But how is that going to help Wanganui in the meantime? According to his own report he is only going to develop 1000 h.p. at Waikaremoana at the present time and two years later he expects to complete Mangahao, when the Waikaremoana poAver will be available for Wanganui. So that we are placed in the position in the meantime, that we do not knoAV what to do, or the best thing to do, because up to the present we have relied on the

promise recorded in Hansard made by the hon. gentleman’s predecessorTime was when a Ministerial promise was a sacred thing, on which anyone could depend their life; but to-day .it seems to me that political morality has got to a lower level: and I have every reason to complain that in the administration of the Public Works Department this change has been made without a satisfactory reason having been given. lam not going to move any motion, or amendment, for the purpose of testing the feeling of the House, because I know perfectly well where I would be if I did. The party machine is so strongly developed here that nothing can break it as far as I can see, but we still have the privilege on this side of the House of speaking up, and speaking plainly, and letting the people of New Zealand know how things have developed. I do hope that as a result of the protest I am making some attempt will be made by the hon. gentleman to be fair in the allocation of the public moneys entrusted to him by the people of New Zealand; moneys that do not belong to him, but to the people, and that he will realise that he has an equal duty to all parts of New Zealand —that it is his business to expend public moneys equitably and fairly throughout the Dominion, and not specially favour one part of the Dominion as against another.