LEVEL CROSSING DANGER

Waikato Times, Volume 100, Issue 16750, 17 March 1926, Page 8

LEVEL CROSSING DANGER

STATEMENT BY HON. J. Q. COATES COST WOULD BE EXCESSIVE. (Times Correspondent.) WELLINGTON, Tuesday. Following the inquest on the Packakariki fatality and a meeting of Cabinet yesterday afternoon, the Prime Minister and Minister of Railways (Right Hon. J. G. Coatcs) made the following statement regarding level crossings:—

"My policy in regard to the level crossing problem was clearly set out in the Railways Statement presented to Parliament last session as being one for the 'elimination of tlie more dangerous level crossings and provision of warning appliances at. others.' That, policy has been, and is being, carried out. When, however, on account of recent most regrettable level creasing fatalities, it is seriously advanced that the Railway Department should eliminate all level crossings, something is asked for beyond what was ever included in the immediate intentions of cither tho railway administration or Parliament. In Other Countries.

"Information from other countries where level crossings constitute an even more formidable problem than in New Zealand goes to shew that the tendency is to do away with gates and gate-keepers, and to depend on warning notices, visible or audible signals, and the good sense of vehicle drivers for securing safety at level crossings. On the Italian State railways there are 13,000 public level crossings, in Holland nearly 3000, on the French lines 30,000, and in the United States 250.000 on first-class lines. In none of the countries referred to, whether the railways arc privately or publicly owned, is there any programme for the elimination of alt crossings.

"The expenditure, of several millions on unrcmiincraUvc works, which a programme for the complete elimination "of the level crossings in New Zealand would call for, could not be justified to the taxpayers. If the railusers were called upon to pay interest on this expenditure, all railway charges would have to be raised, making it still more difficult for the railways to compete for traffic with the road-users, and throwing an additional burden on the taxpayer through losses on account of railway operations.

"The Railway Department is now working as a business concern, and must be given an opportunity to carry on its operations under fair competitive conditions. It would not have this opportunity were its present disadvantages of track cost.and upkeep increased by heavy unrcmuneralivc expenditure entirely for the benefit of road-users.

Working With Highway Board. "It must be borne in mind that the roads and the railways of New Zealand were built by the State to meet its Iransncrl. needs. Each should share the" burden, therefore, of expense incurred for public well-being at the crossing places of road and rail. In this regard the Railway Department lias always willingly borne its share in the cost of eliminating level crossings at those points where, local bodies have asrcod 1o pay their fail' proportion of the cost. Since the institution cf the Main Highways Hoard the Railway Department has also been working in conjunction with (hat body in carrying out proposals for improvements at road and railway intersections. "The principle of making each level crossing as safe as possible for careful road-users is incorporated in the ixisting policy of the railway administration, and of all other interested public bodies. This policy is being nut info effect. In all countries (inch.iing England and America) where level crossing problems exist, it is recognised Hint no matter whether the lines are privately or State-owned, the cost of eliminating any crossings should be apportioned between the railways and the pi.blic aulhorili'.'S representative of the road-users."