The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas et Prevalebit. FRIDAY, AUGUST 10, 1883. A Railway Board.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume IV, Issue 1018, 10 August 1883, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas et Prevalebit. FRIDAY, AUGUST 10, 1883. A Railway Board.

So far as can be seen at present, it appears to be more than doubtful whether the House will agree to the recommendation of the Hon. Walter Johnston, as put forth in his Public ! Works Statement, that a new Minister , should be appointed, to have control over our railways. It will be remembered that the Government had decided on the creation of a new portfolio as being better suited to the requirements of the colony than the alternative scheme that had been suggested of having railway matters administered by a non-political Board. That the present system calls foi urgent reform is generally admitted, nor are we at all certain that the latter expedient advocated by Mr Johnston is preferable to that which he favored last year. Mr Wright is known to hold very strong opinions upon this point, and he has been working quietly and persistently in order to formulate some practical scheme which should embody the views he and those who think with him hold. That the question has not been taken up in a party spirit is shown by the fact that the Committee which waited on the Premier on Wednesday for the purpose of laying their case before him contained three decided Oppositionists, namely, Messrs Macandrew, Thomson, and Fish. The member for Ashburton was chosen as spokesman on this occasion, and anybody who peruses the speech he delivered cannot fail to be struck with the force of the arguments used in support of a Railway Board being instituted. He pointed out that every Minister of Public Works, with the exception of Mr Oliver and Sir John Hall, had expressed themselves as favorable to the views advocated by the deputation, and even the two gentlemen mentioned had admitted that a Board of Advice was desirable. Nor do we think that Mr Wright exaggerated when he stated that if the railways had been controlled by a body not under direct political influence several hundreds of thousands of pounds would have been saved to the colony. The evils arising from log-roll-ing have been so obvious that they could not fail to be recognised, and it is difficult to see how this pernicious system can be put a stop to while things are allowed to go on as they are at present. In Victoria the abuse of political patronage became so glaring that reform was compulsory, and now the lailways of that colony are administered by a Board somewhat similar to that suggested by Wednesday’s deputation. We in New Zealand have not come to the same pass in this respect as our neighbors, but we are fast tending that way, and unless a change is made there will be reason to regret our dilatoriness in not preventing an evil before it became too great. As it is, there have been constructed lines, especially in the North Island, that have benefited only a few people who possessed sufficient influence to successfully carry through political jobs. Another important point would be gained by the institution of a Railway Board. Under the existing regime, an immense quantity of time is wasted in the Legislature over the discussion of petty trivialities, which could easily be settled if there were a responsible b*Ody to whom such matters might be referred. A platelayer’s salary is reduced, or some trumpery departmental squabble occurs, and a member is sure to be found who will take the grievance up and try to invest the question with a dignity out of all proportion to its importance. The result is that the aggrieved official only obtains the meagre satisfaction of knowing that he has formed the subject for a useless discussion, while no end of bad feeling is engendered in the department to which he belongs. Indeed, nobody would have more reason to be gratified with the change than the officials themselves, who would thus be secured from oppres-

sion and partiality, and those holding the more responsible posts would not be hampered by political considerations, as is the case now. A change of Government often means an entire alteration in the mode of carrying out public works, and it stands to reason that an officer who simply held his position at the will of those in power would not unfreqnently be called upon to carry out a policy which his own experience and knowledge would condemn.

The deputation had no reason to complain of the manner in which the

Premier accepted the suggestions put before him by them. Mr Whitaker stated that personally he was in favor of a non-political Board having the control of our railways, and the principal, if not the only, objection to the scheme in the eyes of the Government was whether it would be wise to give so much power to a body not distinctly responsible to Parliament for what might be expended. This objection, however, is by n« means insuperable, as any difference concerning finance which might arise between the Board and the Minister of Public Works could be referred to Parliament for decision. The proper administration of our railways is one of the most important questions engaging the attention of our legislators, and now that a scheme has been clearly set forth which must commend itself to every person of common sense it is to be hoped that the reform so strenuously and ably advocated by the member tor Ashburton will be carried out.