OUR BADLY-MANAGED

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 660, 10 November 1909, Page 5

OUR BADLY-MANAGED

i -;;y.;RAILWAYS/: ■■; ■■■;■. ■;-:■ -/,.;'•',;" •;'■;-'/ ' V' 1 '" ' — : ';""; ;V ' r SOME STRIKING FIGURES. .-■•■.. -'-. tTo the Editor.] : / Sir,—The figures published in -your'.leading; 'article of November 8 with reference to the. railways of the different States of the Common-, .wealth and of the 'Dominion' I '-are sufficiently startling as showing the unprogressive management of our railways. If, however, we go back' •for'a series ' of years the figures become still more condemnatory; The figures I give below are taken from table 15 of our Railway Statement,', and ;though" they differ in some degree (Especially with'regard to Victoria) from the figures supplied by the-various State railway reports and frqm ,the figures .in the Commonwealth Yesr Book, are, I presume, l accurate, or they would not be published in the New Zealand Railway Statement. ■ ..' .'-The three great tests of the paying capacity of a railway are the net earnings per mile of railway, the net earnings per-train mile, that is, .the net. earnings of each mile every train runs, and the net earnings on the cost of construction. .: I; propose: to take the figures for the five years 1904-08, as-1908, is.the- last complete list .of figures available at present for all the States; '."■:; , '■ ' ■:

.;•' Net Earnings per Average Mile, Open.-' '•" N.Z. 'Vio. -N.S.TW. QTd. S.A. W.A. Tas. £ £ £ :'" '£'■-.£■ £ . £ W •'...-. 321 " ■ 450 365 174 260 266 176 '05 ... 304- 433 455-195-285 226 ■ 155 •06'... 304 "492 . : 572 '.;219 -, 310' .269 146'07 ... 334 ,-570 ' 645 : 292 361 239 '154 '08 ..'.328 ,468 ; ■ "645 ■■■ 277 385 270 161 ,'O9 .... 320 '... _| It will be seen'that while during this quinquennial period.New.Zealand has been comparatively stationary, all the other railways 'have advanced'in earning powers, except Tasmania; the advance iri- New' South Wales, Queensland, and South Australia being especially/marked. ■ -.. ■ ... '■■.'..■ -; Net Earnings per Train Mile. .N.Z. Vic. N.S.W. QTd. S.A. W.A. Tas. : :'d. , d.■ ' ■■> A. '; 'd. d. '"*d. • d.' •04 .... 31.27 39.67 27.17 31.13 21.34 .20.95 '05 ... 28.04 38.90 34.20 29.25 34.00, 15.84 ' 18.29 •06- ...27.23 42.71 39.00 31.00 35.64 23.82 17.40 '07 :.: 28.79; 46.30 41.00.36.00 '38.93 23.04 17.68 ■08- ... 27.57 36.69 37.54 33.00 36.76 29.92 17.69 '09 •:.,_ 26.1 i. ■.-.-■■'. . ■, •Sere again, -the, earning powers of the New Zealand .railways show & : marked contrast to those :of the other States, Tasmania and New •Zealand both' come, out badly. In 1908 the Victorian railways seem to have done than,-usual, but, then large concessions .were made ■on rates . and fares amounting, according to. the Commonwealth Year Book, to a total reduction of' .£114,000. per annum. '■':"' Percentage' Net Earnings to'Oapital Invested. . ;'.,'■„ N.Z. . Vic. N.S.W.QTd. :S.A. :\7.A. Tas. ' . V-. i' P.c. p.c. p.c. p.c. p.c. p.c. p.c. •04: ..:'••: 3.58 3.68 . 2.78 2.36 3.33 4.56 2.09 '05 '...v,.3.50 . ,3.54- 3:46 2:77. , 3.65 ■ 3.61 , 1.83 '06.-."..-•; 3.24 • -'4.03 4.43 : 3.14 ' 3.96 4.34 ' 1.74 '07: ...:■ 3.45- ,4.24 ■ 4.96 .4.20 4.75 3.90 1.84 ,'OB. .....--3.33'. 3.79 4.88 3.98 5.12 4.60 1.90 '09 ;,...-".3.13,' -.. ;, '- . ■:.. .-. "•'• ■

vThis- table,,shows the :.New Zealand- railways ' at their worst,- even' the practically bankrupt railways 'of "Tasmania'''dp , ' not;show ,'suc'h 'adownward course! Compare the steadily decreasing Earning; power of .the New Zealand railways with- the phenomenal-increase of New, South- .Wales, Queensland,'' and South Australia, yet -New South-.Wales during .-the-last-two-years has made reductions in charges, , - and fares estimated -to'amount. to jei74,000 per- annum,'and'in''Queensland,, to iSIOO.OOO per annum:. ; In New Zealand, is far as -'I.know,; no\material. reductions have been made since 1904.'/ All 'the colonies have .enjoyed unexampled prosperity during the qiiinquoiinial period, so. that nothing-can be argued.oh that score. In fade the' prond.:bbast lof our-Government,'has. ■been : -that:.we'-wero -more, prosperous- than our rieighbours.v- Tho most significant-circumstance is.;.that ,, ..the- two most unprogrcssive. railway- .- Systems,-: those' of. Xew. Zealand and ■ Tasmania,' .flfe-uHder. tho control of. responsible-Ministers, while; the , other, railways aroimanaged. by non- y ; poHticaKcomims.sioners..' - One. oth«r table and >)vill' not' : snace further.; It. is -a .most instructive onej-'as it affords one of the. keys: to the unprogressiveness of our railways:— ■ ■:-'. i' ■■--.-; '. . ': .;',■' ' '■■ ' •;■ ' Percentage of Working Expenses to' Earnings^. -'•: .'..;::N^. i .- l -Yic..N.S.W.QTd. S:A..;W.A. Tas. '. ■•:•'. p.c. ', p. 0.. p.c.....p.c.' p.c, p.c. ; p:c. .'O4--..: .65.99'55.90 65:74 ' 62.13 . 58.47 '■ 74.23 67.16 '05-' ... '■: 67.58 59.17 59.50 57.64 . 58.19 78.01 .- 70.47 '06-:...; '69.00 : 55.88 ■ 54.51. 55.84 57.03 73.53 7156 •07; '... 16106 . 51.75 :: 53.08 ' ; 49.88':. 55:45'.■ 73.89 ,71.83 .'OB \ ~. -'.70:59 f 59.02:'. 54.91 64.01 '. 56.02 67.10, 72.69 , 09; T -. t i-ii'-72.«>:-v.-;.- : .;:-' : -'-', ."-.■■■.:'.■ ■ "■."-. ; :'- ; ■ Itvwill;b'e : seen how , the'peroentage- 1 has .in, creased:steadily in'New'Zealand'and Tasmania; wKile it has-been 'tip;and down in.'Victoria, but-in'the .other, railways it has decreased to a cousiderabU 'extent.---' It. bas been;,argued that our. theiict that onr railways'arej-in ..isolated .portions.' ■ If.' there is anything;in'this;argument, then next. y:ear's percentage should 'be. less' than the', present year,''owing to the linking up of the Auckland and Wellington-Napier-New Plymouth sections, but as again?t'that;argument it may he pointed out that.' the; Queensland .railways are as much, .disconnected;units:.as-'ours,.arid..that in the New. Zealand "railways' the'. Hiirunui-Bluff section', which is'the Jine'fromCulverden'to Invercargill, with all 'its branches, and? is the nipst- 'connected- unit of any of our railways, shows v the steadiest ihcreise' of working' experises. .1n, ; 190i. it -n-as; 6T.59; and in 1909,77.12. As : far. aswages are. concerned, no. one,wishes to-reduce-them, and- , there is'leallT very little, aifference":between .the'..wages/paid to railway .hands in the different : States. v - In some .instances,'the', wages paid , on-the New Zealand railways ,a're'.below those >aid -in other' States, 'notably',lll the 1 , very .important, nositions of !engin€-driv.ers7and' guards.". 'In" ,New South AYfiles;-for ! ,instance, the ■ maximum to 'which these"'officers' can.'attain is higher.than : in New Zealand:''" ■■ 'V '. .' ■~- 'i. In'..cbnclusjon, '■'.' I - think the figures, quoted show, that-in' .&, nye : year period .of great prosperity in-the.; Australasian coloiiies-.the profits 'on'->the'New railways increased in-a far ;less:':proportion..vthsn those of-any .other State-owned: railway, except : Tasmania.' That o.vlr working-expenses have been mounting up, while-those of the.majority.of the' railway's^ha've-decreased: .in proportion to their earnings.-'That the most -prosperous railways ha.ve,'been-'those, managed by. commissioners, and , the-least.prosperous -. have , ,been those, managed , under the direct control of a Minister of the Crown. .■.,■ j ; .'" '■■...,..■ -, :".-;'■.-. >■;'.'-', I-am,' yours.faithfully, ' • ■'. ; XO'y V ~W.H. HERRIES,