If. mander, m.p.

I.—2a.

4

tains. My opinion in this respect has never changed, nor will it change, no matter what the decision of Parliament may be. lam more than satisfied that, if competent men were appointed not only to examine both routes, but also to examine the area of the land to be served by each, which can only be done not by simply travelling over the routes, but by travelling over the lands to be served, which would mean travelling east and west, more especially to take note of the area of the land which would be rendered inaccessible by the adoption of the western route owing to the ranges of hills and mountains, which is a most essential point, and all the land to the west of the Tangihua Mountains could be easily and more cheaply served by a connection with the main line, either from Mititai or a point opposite Mount Wesley, both on the Northern Wairoa. The adoption of the western route not only shuts out practically the whole of the Whangarei County, but it also shuts out the whole of the lower Mangakahia, the Purua, Moengawahine, and Hikurangi Valleys, all containing lands suitable for sheep and dairy farms. There is everything to gain and nothing to lose by inquiry, and, if the Minister is confident that his decision is the right one, he should have no hesitation in recommending the appointment of a Commission." As f have said, sir, I think that some very substantial reasons should be given before such a drastic change as this is made; and no such reasons have so far been given. This is a statement that appeared in the Auckland Star —a Government paper (and 1 am simply quoting it for. what it is worth) shortly after the Minister of Public Works had travelled through the country : " ' From a constructional point of view, the country on the western route is everything in our favour,' is the reply of the Hon. li. McKenzie, Minister of Public Works) to the statement of the member for Marsden that the route chosen for the North Auckland Trunk Railway is a political deviation. ' The cost of construction,' says the Minister, ' might be regarded as about the same on both routes, as we have no definite data to go on at present to for an estimate, but, judging from my observations when travelling through the country, I should say that the route adopted will turn out to be cheaper and more economical, especially in view of the heavy constructional-works between Pukekaroro and the Bald Hill, on the eastern route. The political aspect could not concern me, and Cabinet decided unanimously on the western route upon the evidence.' " The Minister practically tells the country that lie has got no data to go upon. Judging by his own observation in going through the couutry once he has come to the conclusion that the western route is the best, and that is the only evidence so far that we have received in the matter. I asked the Minister for a plan of the route, and he could not supply me with one. He had no correct plan of the route, he said, ft seems to me that the Minister was quite premature in coming to his decision. If he had gone through that country and from his own observation bad decided that the western route was the best, it was surely the right thing for the Minister to get the engineers to survey that route, to have it thoroughly surveyed, and then come down with a report as to the cost of the line, its length, &c, and so satisfy the public that the route he had chosen he had chosen after due deliberation and consideration. But so far he has produced no proof that the route he has decided on is the best. 1 have put a notice of motion on the Order Paper three times. It reads as follows: " Mr. Mander to move, That there be laid before this House a return showing the cost, length, and full particulars of the proposed deviations of the North Auckland Main Trunk Railway from points of divergence from original line at northern and southern ends; also the cost of original route from same points." That is a very fair question to ask. The public have a right to know, when their money is beingexpended, whether the Minister's judgment is sound in a matter of this kind; but so far, though I have renewed that question twice, I have got no answer to it. I think the people have a right to a report before such a deviation is made. If it were a new railway there would be less argument, but we say that we have got very strong argument indeed in favour of the present route being maintained, and it is for the Minister to bring substantial evidence before this Committee, or the House, or the country to prove that the route he has adopted is the cheapest, the shortest, and will serve the greatest population. This I assert emphatically he cannot do, and I am prepared to put £1,000 into any charity that the Minister likes to name if he can bring down an engineer's report to the House to prove that the line he has adopted is the cheapest, the shortest, and will serve the greatest population. Now, the Minister made certain statements in regard to population. I do not suppose that the Minister intentionally misrepresented the position with regard to the population, because no doubt he got his information from his clerks; but his clerks are absolutely wrong. In making his calculations the Minister has calculated the whole of the Otamatea County as being on the west of the line, while it extends down to the east coast. He has calculated 1,000 of population there, which ought to be calculated on the eastern side. That is one mistake. Then, in calculating the population of the Whangarei County, he calculated the population on the east coast from that point [indicated], ten miles from the Whangarei Railway. If it is fair to leave out all that population twenty-three miles from the east coast when calculating the population of the eastern side, it is also fair, surely, to exclude the population the same distance from the Wairoa River on the other side. The figures shown on this map I have had certified by competent accountants. This other map [indicated] is an enlargement of one that appeared in the Star. I may say that we have suggested a compromise in this matter, to fix the matter up without any further difficulty, and this I believe can be done in the interests of all parties concerned. Only about two hundred settlers would be affected if the compromise we suggest is adopted. This is our suggestion : There is a point there called Rodgers's. We propose that the railway should come on as authorised at present, and then turn off to Rodgers's. [Proposed route pointed out on map.] That would get over all the difficulty about this line, and lam satisfied that it would suit every one, except - the settlers on the Bickerstaffe Estate and Whakapirau, about two hundred in all. That would be a very sensible compromise to make, and it would save the country about .£93,000, according to Mr. Stewart's report. We are going to stand by Mr. Stewart's report till it is disproved. He is one of the most competent engineers in New Zealand on railway matters.