WEST COAST LINE

Wanganui Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 160796, 2 November 1920, Page 9

WEST COAST LINE

LEYIN-GREATFORD DE VIATION - . LIVELY DISCUSSION IN PAR- i LIAMENT. (By Telegraph—Special to “Herald”). WELLINGTON, Nov. 1. A long debate occurred unexpectedly in the' House this afternoon on the question. of improved railway cpmmUni-i cation between Wellington and the West Coast, arising out of a petition favouring the deviation of the Main Trunk line from Levin to Greatford. The Public Petitions, Committee recommended that the report be forwarded to the Government for consideration, but in view of the contemplated alterations at Palmerston North, the matter receive early attention. Mr R. W. Smith contended that the deviation would cut down the time taken by the express, and would be built for probably less than the expensive alterations proposed to he made at Palmerston North. A comprehensive report ought to be* made on the question, particularly the desirability ®of improving railway facilities for people on the Main Trunk north-of Marten Junction. Mr Nash said he'would not have spoken about the petition but for the Committee’s reference to Palmerston North. The Department had duly 27 acres of laud for the extensive alterations required to,make' the facilities at Palmerston North equal to the trade, but 50 acres of land were required; Members could scarcely realise the inconvenience which would he caused in transhipment on the deviation. It would involve the erection of two long 'bridges, and would run through country subject, to heavy floods. If the deviation had been built, it' would at present be ; unworkable, as most of the track would be under water. The work at Palmerston was purely Departmental,; and was not asked for by the town; but when the public realised that this 40-years-old agitation had been revived, they would make their opposition known. For many years the Sandon tramway had been an incubus to the County Council, and this deviation would be, a splendid chance to get rid of it.. He regarded it as absolutely dangerous to railwaymen to have to work. in so congested a yard as Palmerston.’ He took exception to the Committee’s failure to let him know that the petition was being considered, so that he could give evidence. Mr Newman, who presented the petition, said it was allowed to stand on its merits, and no evidence was called. It was admitted by all the experts that the line to Palmerston would have to be duplicated. The deviation would save 17 miles on the through journeys, and was, /therefore, a national work. It should have been located along this route originally. He understood that the Minister of Railways and Public Works intended to go over the grqund when the House rose. ' Mr Nash: Tf they can see it (Laugh-, ter.) / Mr W. Rhodes stated that the Committee had n* local prejudices. What impressed it was' the possibility of the saving of 17 miles in 40. Therefore, they thought the Government ought to consider the scheme before it expended, a large sum on alterations at Palmerston. There was a report from the Railway Department, which, to say the least of it, was not unfavourable. It mentioned that there were no. engineering difficulties. ' - Mr W. H, Field could not see what Palmerston had to object to in the report. It suggested that Ministers should go over the route for themselves and see the national interests which were involved in the big saving of time. One would regret that the deviation would sidetrack Palmerston North, but that town would get the same facilities as at present, as through passengers would have to tranship there. The proposed deviation to west of Palmerston North -went over swampy country, which at present was a lake. *lt was doubtful whether the deviation proposed by the Commis sion would cost more than the Palmerston North. It was utter rubbish to suggest that the line would run through drifting sqnd. As a matter of fact, most ,of the line vpuld go through very fair country. Its improved grade would save enormous cost in haulage. THE REAL PROBLEM. Mr Veitch suggested that it was not necessarily commonsense to claim that the cutting out of 17 miles between Marten and Wellington would improve the position in the way of rolling stock. A 4 a matter of fact, it would be worse, because of the necessity for transhipment and delay in shunting ,vehicles for the existing Palmerston line. If all through trains went over this route, how would people get to Palmerston or Napier. The real problem was between Paekakiriki and Wellington. This section caused more delay a&d loss on the working of the West Coast line than anything else. The line' ought to be duplicated on ,-a good grade from Wellington to Paekakiriki, then all parts of the country beyond that railway bottle neck would benefit. Anyone who realised the position would admit that drastic improvement at Palmerston North was needed, and the Greatford deviation would be no relief. The proposed bridge at Bulls, would probably cost as much as the Palmerston North improvements, while the whole of the deviation would cost more than the duplication of the line between , Wellington and Paekakiriki. It was absurd to suggest that this deviation was a ■matter of The Commit-, tee did not appear to have had,all the facts before it. Sir William Herries: There was a Royal Commission, which reported -against it. Mr Yeitch moved to refer the report back to the Committee. Hon, D. H. Guthrie described the deviation as an old chestnut, which had been debated for years'. It would be unwise to cut a district 60 miles' by 40 in extent, which was going to bedome a very rich in order to save only half an hour bn the Wellington-Auck-land run. The proposed deviation went through country which was the worst place for floods he knew of, and if the deviation was provided, it would be through a lot of poor land. Railways along the seashore were always criticised because they could only be fed from one. side. He had always opposed such railways, and he would oppose this railway and support the amendment. Mr Horn, a memjjcr of the Committee, said they had made an unsuccessful attempt to find the member for Palmerston North, who might be interested. - Mr Guthrie : You neyer thought of the member for Oroua, who was deeply interested. . Mr Edie" agreed with the member for Gisborne that it was. very presumptions of certain members to ask for a deviation when the district had a railway for which it should be thankful. Mr Reed remarked that he would not ;have taken the position seriously but for the intention of'the Premier and Minister of Works to go over the route. Mr Mastey: Why shouldn’t they? Wa

are not the sort who fear to go where angels fear to tread. Mr S. G. Smith, while interested in the shortening of the rail, journey to New Plymouth, considered that other calls were more urgent. THE BACK-BLOCKS PROTESTS. Mr Lysnar protested against even considering a deviation to cost £250,000 while many parts of New Zealand had no railway at all. It was a ridiculous proposal, and if the Government adopted it they would he going away from their declared policy on public works. Let the lines now in hand be completed. It was amusing to hear a quarrel about new stations and deviations when such a district as Gisborne had millions of acres of land not served by any sort of a railway. Seventeen miles ,of line in his district would do much-more good. "It should be turned put neck and crop," declared Mr Lysnar energetically. “If should have no consideration- at all until there are railways" provided where there are virgin lands to settle.” . “These people are very lucky, to be riding in a train at all,” declared Mr Williams, another East Coast member. There seems to be an idea/that because our district is called Poverty .Buy there is no necessity to do Anything for it. Mr Howard; Call it Sunshine Alley. Mr Williams: You have to go through Poverty Bay to get to the Bay of Plenty. Mr Ngata declared that if there was going to be an inquiry the East Coast members would like to be in It. They wanted to be in- any row -about railway expenditure, 1 because they maintained that- for every sovereign spent on city lines £lO ought bo be spent in the backblocks. • The talk had gone on so long that neither motion or amendment could be put before the Souse adjourned. '