ACCESS TO SEA

Press, Volume LXXIX, Issue 23977, 18 June 1943, Page 3

ACCESS TO SEA

COST OF TUNNEL ROAD SCHEME PORT CHRISTCHURCH LEAGUE OPINIONS ‘T think you can definitely rule out the tunnel road. I don’t believe there is any possibility of the scheme coming to pass,” said the Mayor (Mr E. H. Andrews) when he addressed a public meeting called by the Port Christchurch League last evening. Mr Andrews, who presided, added that he could not imagine any Government spending money on railway yards and sheds in Christchurch, and bringing its railway system up-to-date at a cost of many hundreds of thousands ot pounds if there was going to be a tunnel road. “I can’t imagine any Government killing its milch cow and salting it down—a cow producing such a revenue for them,” said Mr Andrews. ‘The tunnel road scheme would mean a big remodelling of Lyttelton, and the expense would be enormous. 1 don t think any Government would give up that verv lucrative piece of railway after all that money has been spent and is being spent on it.” There was an attendance of 15 persons, .and Mr Andrews said it seemed very difficult to wake up the interest of Christchurch people. Thousands were interested in the projects that had been proposed, but they did not seem to be prepared to come to meetings and back up their opinions. Reason For Controversy Mr Andrews said the tunnel roadPort Christchurch controversy had arisen again through the Government’s request for a list of works that might be used for rehabilitation. Whichever scheme was undertaken, it would be carried out by modern machinery and not by hand labour, although big schemes must employ a big number of men. Referring to changes in methods of transport after the war, Mr Andrews said cargo and passengers would probably be carried by airships and flyingboats. Flying-boats had to have water to land on, and the Estuary, if it could not be deepened enough for ships, probably it could be deepened at reasonable expense to take them. ‘‘We should look to the future,” said Mr Andrews. ‘‘Christchurch has such huge advantages that it ought to be undoubtedly the chief manufacturing city of New Zealand. It has cheap land and plenty of it, cheap electricity, plenty of water, t and everything to encourage manufacturing.” Aerial photographs of Lyttelton and plans of the Port Christchurch Scheme was shown by Mr R. B. Cotton, who said that the only proposition for Christchurch in the future was a port in the Estuary. Lyttelton was not a port which lent itself to expansion as a port for a manufacturing centre. Today Lyttelton was throttling and killing Christchurch. Adverse Report The president of the league (Mr J. Longton) criticised the tunnel road scheme, which, he said, would cripple Canterbury for all time. The advocates of the tunnel road had set up their own commission, which had reported more adversely against the tunnel road than any other schemes. Mr Longton explained that the Port Christchurch League had been in recess for some time, but when rehabilitation schemes had been called for, arrangements had been made to call a meeting and try to revive the league and get a bit of propaganda over. The meeting decided to place the Port Christchurch scheme before the Minister of Rehabilitation (the Hon. R, Semple) as a major work for rehabilitation purposes. On the suggestion of Mr G. P. Purnell the executive was recommended to endeavour to arrange for a referendum to be arranged on the Port Christchurch scheme.