MINISTRY FOR TRANSPORT.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19146, 1 November 1927, Page 9

MINISTRY FOR TRANSPORT.

BUREAUCRATIC CONTROL. VIEWED WITH DISFAVOUR. Considerable uneasiness at the tendency of the present Government towards what was described as further ••bureaucratic control - ' was expressed at the annual conference of the Associated Chambers of Commerce, which concluded yesterday. After some discussion, the question was referred co ihe executive, the suggestion to form a Ministry lor Transport, being the main feature of this discussion. Air H. S. E. Turner. (Canterbury) introduced the subject, stating that ho was very glad to see that so many Chambers nad taken the opportunity, vhicli Air Coates afforded, when he flew his kite in the annual Itailway Statement, of expressing their uneasiness in general at the trend of tho present Government towards more and more bureaucratic control, and m particular their uneasiness at the latest suggestion for the establishment of a Ministry for Transport. Tho Wellington and* Duuedin Chambers liad passed resolutions on the subject, and the Canterbury Chamber had also expressed its uneasiness. Tho conference of the Associated Chambers, which was really the parliament of commerce, should take tho opportunity of examining carefully the proposals and expressing a definite and considered opinion in order that the Government might know not only tho opinions of the various localities, but the general opinion of tho whole commercial community of New Zealand. He was unwise enough recently, he said, to express the opinion on another subject that they liad said so much on the subject that he thought they were all weary of it and had better leave it alone. Another member of the Chamber, who heard the remark, retorted that that attitude was exactly what the Government wanted, and that if it were adopted too frequently the Government would simply have to say to themselves: "We know that there is going to be opposition to this or that proposal, but we also know that, provided we sit tight and let the opposition blow itself out, we shall be able to enrrv out eventually all that we want." "

"Another; Blow."

The coherence should pile another blow on the., blows which had already )*:en delivered both in the Press of .the country and in many of tho local Chambers of Commerce- It was time they took steps to make sure that the public understood tho degree to whicli the Government was infringing on private enterprise and the liberty of the individual subject, and the degree in which they were becoming dependent, not on their own efforts, but on the manner in which the Government, through the permanent departments, injght act. "l'ou will not fail to realise that we are so governed to-day by our elected Government, to nearly the same extent as we are governed by the permanent official, and that there is an increasing tendency towards delegating the authority of Parliament to the permanent officials and so hastening our progress towards almore or less complete bureaucratic control." said Mr Turner. "I see that even the Labour members are beginning to realise this} and Mr Howard in Parliament, only this week, said that, in his opinion, Parliament was slowly losing its control on the country. That control was being passed over to a parliament outside the House of Representatives, a parliament of Departmental heads in the form of the Civil Service. Parliament," said Mr Turner, "was giving away its powers with its eyes open and allowing the Government to be mn> by Order-iu-Council."

"Brake on Progress." The Prime Minister's suggestion that motor transport was to bt> put on a parity with the railways undoubtedly covered an intention to put such a burden on motor transport as would make it impossible for it to beat railway transport, said the speaker. He proposed to put a brake on the wheels oi : progress so as to hold. it back in the interests of an older method of transport in which the country happened to have invested a fairly large amount of capital. The railways performed important functions in the development of the country, without' doubt, but they oould not agree that those functions justified putting the railways, into a special privilege position outside the sphere and influence of more modern forms of transport which were develop-, ing so rapidly. ' One writer in The Press* earlier in the month referred to the' fact that a high official in the Government once said: "It would have been better for Now Zealand if the motor-car had never been invented." "In other words," said Mr Turner, "the early Entons did nofc have electric light or wireless in their caves, so why should we?" Mr Coates had given clear indication of a definite intention, and In the opinion of the speaker he hankered after another Department. Mr Turner moved a resolution, as passed by the Canterbury Chamber recently,' protesting against the suggestion that a Ministry of Transport should bo established.

Mr D. Seymour (Hamilton) seconded the motion. He said he was not in favour of all it connoted. He denied that there had been an increased delegation of powers to Civil servants by Ministers. \ Mr A. G. Lunn (Auckland) said they should be practical in the matter. There was £50,000,000 invested in the railways. Were they going to refuse the Railway Department power to compete with motor transport? The railways : ould not be done without. With the iine roads being built there was a tendency for motor-lorries to carry an increasing quantity of goods. There did seem scope for an impartial Board of Enquiry to go into the whole question. An investigation was essential, and an endeavour must be made to ensure that the railways paid.

Mr G. T. WiJson. of the commercial branch of the railways, said he was not in a position to make a statement. He quoted that made recently by the Prime Minister. The Bailway Department could not possibly undertake motor transport, and make the charges being made by the motor firms. Many of them were going into liquidation through making charges which were too low. They competed unfairly by taklnc the cream of the traffic. Mr W. Machin (president) said that through their abhorrence of Government incursion, they were in danger of swinging to the other extreme. They could not afford to allow somebody to make hay of the £50,000,000 invested in the railways. "I am just a little afraid we are getting too suspicious," he said. "We should move carefully in this matter." '

Proposals Modified. Mr W. Gow (Dunedin) said they would have had a right to complain if the Government had not modified its first intention of setting up another Ministry. As it was not doing so, the motion was unnecessary. Mr C. M. Bowden (secretary), speaking on behalf of the Wellington Chamber, said it was inclined to wait and see, bm it was against unfair interference. No new Department was intended, however, but before long the name of the Railway Department might be changed to the Departing* for Transportation.