LOCAL RAILWAYS

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2274, 7 October 1914, Page 7

LOCAL RAILWAYS

THE BILL IN COMMITTEE STUBBORN OPPOSITION The Local Railways Bill (the Hon. W. Fraser) was committed. Mr. R. M'Callum (Wairau) said lie was ,sorry the Minister Lad not decided to give districts simply a right to guarantee, reserving to tho Government the work of construction and administration. Aβ tlio Bill stood he was afraid it was a dead letter. Mr. D. Buddo (Kaiapoi) said that ho Tras sorry to hare to criticise such a Bill, but it would • have the effect of encouraging a system of railways which would have to be taken over by the State later. ; Why nos allow tho State to do that right away, and let the local oodles contribute to tho lines? ifr.Frasor: Can't do it. Mr. Buddo said that ho could not 'flgreo with a scheme which would supplant State lines by district lines. Dr. A. K. Newman (Wellington East) spoko against the measure, which, he said, was a benighted Bill that harked l>aek to the dark ages. Opposition' members: Hear, hear. Dr. 'Newman: I don't want the applause of tho honourable members opposite. I disapprove of their inner working entirely, but, when I seo fit to criticise a Bill, I am going to do so. An Opposition member: You had better not. Dr. Newman: I am not as anxious about.my seat as the honourable incmbe- is. Dr. Newman repeated that the system proposed in the Bill was o relic of barbarism. Branch railways were not now needed, and motor-cars couid serve the purpose of theso lines without saddling the 1 country with tho same amount of debt. At this stage there was a groat deal of noise arising from the Opposition side of the Chamber, and the Chairman called the House- to order. J)r. Nnwimui: "Wlioro Jirawlina tenor-.

ance unabashed delivers judgment all day long," (Loud laughter.) Dr. Newman concluded, by expressing tho opinion that the Government should make some provision for the use of motor traction for the tisss to-which tlieso branch lines would be put. Mr. J. A. Hanan (Lnvercargill) was of tho opinion that very few local bodies -would take tho system.up. Tho result, if tho scheme was taken up, would be a patchwork system of railways in New Zealand. Tho proposal was retrograde and parochial. ■ From an Unexpected Source, Mr. •A. H. Hindmarsh (Wellington South) asked if the Opposition wished to deny tho people in isolated districts tho right to construct a railway wheu the Government would not build one. Members should know that these branch lines would not be built by tho State; experience must be their guido in arriving at that conclusion, and experience taught that the Main Trunk railway took twenty years to build and that other "lines" Qiad never been proceeded with. Mr. Hindmarsh could not understand the attitude of the member for Invercargill (Mr, Hanan); seemingly that gentleman wished to see a despotism created by tho aggregation of all control over railways in tho hands of tho central Government. . Tho Hon. R. M'Kenzio (Motueka) agreed with Dr. Newman on tho subject. Branch railways were needed in New Zealand, but they would not be constructed to the advantage of the settlors or the taxpayers of New Zealand under, the Bill. . The way proposed was strewn with pitfalls, and he felt sure that only two or three lines would bo constructed under it in many years. There was! nothing in the Bill to ensuro uniformity in the railways of tho country. The Hon. W, Fraseri Are you quite sure? The Hon. Mr. M'Kenzie: Yes; perfectly. I have -been through the Bill very carefully. / Tho only thing por- f vided for is the gauge. Whose the Risk? Mr. E. Newman (Rangatikei) said that Mr. Hanan had spoken fcum a railway man's point of view of a country need, and had displayed about the amount of intelligence that one would expect. (Hear, hear.) Railways were needed in districts where good metal for roads could not be,procured at all, or could only bo got at grjat cost. He' went on to say that those who criticised the Bill overlooked the fact that the settlers would undertake the construction of lines at their own risk, and that they would hardly rate themselves if the line was not going to pay. . Mr. G. Forbes (Hurunui) declared fliat tho Bill was the thin end of tho wedge to disrupt tho system of State railways on which the present Government had never ■■ looked kindly. Mr. G. V. Pearco (Patea) congratulated tho Government on having introduced the Bill, which would do away with tho "dog-in-the-manger" policy -of the late Government, which, whilo refusing to make railways for the settlers, would not allow- the settlers to make them for themselves. It was not practicable to keep roans ill order for motor traffic. In tho 'ia-.i-naki province there were lengths of ■roads which cost £2000 a mile to make, and £300 per;mile a year to maintain. This heavy cost was due to the r.eavy traffic, and it would surely be bettor to have this traffic put on to rails. The Worth of Light Railways. Mr. G. Witty (Riccarton) objected to railways being made under tho system proposed in the Bill becauso they would eventually become privately owned. There would-be log-rolling if the Bill was passed. ;■. The Government should allow the railways to be built under' tho' betterment system, if they were not going. to undertake the work in the ordinary way. Ho objected to the franchise proposed,' because there would be plural voting. Mr. W. A.; Veiteh (Wanganui) said that under the policy, of the Bill the Government would havo landed on its shoulders all the poor concerns, but, through political log-rolling, would not be able to secure possession of those lines which were a financial success. Hβ said that though the Government talked of light railways for branch lines, the fact was that light lines would result in an immense waste of. public money. , Mr. G. W. Russell (Avon) deemed the Bill to be one marking an important departure from the principle that all railways in this country should be built by the State. The Bill was purposely intended to help to raise the rate of intorost throughout this country. Mr. Payne Again. ' Mr. J. Payne (Groy Lynn) characterised the Bill as "a big Tory shuffle" to shirk the responsibility of providing transport facilities. Tho Chairman roso to direct Mr. Payne to keep to the subject, and, as he was rising to do so, Mr. Payne remarked: "Yes, sir, I know it affects your party!" Tho Chairman did not appear to hear the remark, but Mr. C. K. Wilson: drew his attention to it, and suggested that tho words should be talten-down. Tho Chairman said that he had not heard Mr. Payne. say anything that was out of order. Thus the incident closed, and the do-' bate went on its course. The Minister Answers Critics. Tho Hon. yVIr. Fraser, replying to some questions, and answering some of the criticisms, said that tho Government had not yet arranged to build any railways under tho Bill. It had been said by Opposition members that they would not have criticised the Bill to such an oxtent if the Government was' going to build the railways (and build them properly), and run the State rolling stock on them. Tlio fact was that if the board dosired these- things they would find them provided for in the Bill. It had even been said that tho Bill was going to be a. death-blow to the State railways. Why, this measure would only provide for adjuncts to the State system! Forseveral years people who needed railways in their districts had said: "If you can't build'a lino, allow us to do so." He had told the peoplo that ho agreed with their suggestion, and, accordingly, ho had brought down tho Bill.

Voting Pov/er. Mr. J. M'Combs (Lyttolton) observed that ono of the critics'had laid it down that a Minister must-bring in a perfect J3ill, but pointed out that if that view was correct there would be no need for the House, and measures could go straight from the Minister to the Statute Book. Mr. M'Combs agreed ] that rating areas should bo createtl but : said tiiat the Government should pre-: servo the- national character of the ■ railways. If tlio people of-a certain district wanted a railway, tho Government should construct it, and tlio charges should be levied against th& special rating area. He considered that the Bill would apply the betterment .principle in a measure, but not to the full extent. .Replying to a question by Mr. Vcitch, tho Ho:i. W. Fraser said that if tlio Government took over a railway from ono of tho boards tho rating powor would cease. The Minister passed on to rofer to the remarks which bad been made about plural voting. Ho said that tho members who made these lomarks kne-w perfectly well that in company concerns tlio number o£ votes bold by shareholders depemlcd upon the amount of money put into the enterprise. When men pledged their property, their voting power was allotted according to tlio extent of their pledges. Mr. Russell's Expert Financier. Mr. G. W. lUiescll (Avon) hero announced to a rather amused tlcmsQ

that what was wanted was a strong, fearless Government which would raiso tho monoy itsolf for this kind of work — a strong financier such as Sir Joseph Ward.

The Hon, J, Allen (Minister of Finance), who had not .been in the House for a little while, entered in timo to hear these observations, and, as eoon as Mr. Russell resumed his seat, ho rose and vigorously dissected thorn. "What," ho asked, "havo he (Mr. Russell) and his export financier been doing in their last twenty-fire years of golden opportunity?" Mr. Russell.had said that tho Government should not build railways for the settlers, unless tho settlers rated ■themselves^'for the undertakings. Let go to the country with that as their election policy!

Hero Mr. Payne thrust himself upon the scene once more.

While the Minister of Finance was still speaking, tho member for Grey Lynn interjected in a harsh voice: "They are only' a lot of old women financiers!"

The Chairman: The honourable- gentleman made a. remark which I must ask him to withdraw. I understand that .he directed the remark at the honourable tho Minister of Finance. Mr. Payne: I said, "they are only a lot of old women financiers." I referred to the Government, not to the Minister. In tho circumstances I refuse to withdraw. The Chairman: As I heard it, I understood tho remark to bo made towards tho Minister of Finance. Mr. Payne: I was referring to tho Government. The Chairman: I accept tho honourable gentleman's word. Mr. Payne (very loudly): I included the Government as a whole. . Mr. H. G. Ell (Christchurch South) said that the Bill was not necessary, and that sufficient power existed under the Tramways Act. Mr. F. H.'Smith and Mr. A. H. Hindmarsh both argued that if the people in til© cities wero allowed to build tramways for themselves, surely the farmers in.the back country ought to bo allowed a like privilege. Proposal Which.Would Kill the Bill. . The debate dragged on, and it was not until a few minutes before 11 p.m. that tho first clause (short title) was passed. Mr. G. Witty moved an amendment to Clause 3, which provides that railway districts may be constituted on tho petition of one-fourth of the ratepayers within tho area concerned. He proposed that the petition should be signed by a majority of the ratepayers. ( Tho amendment was lost on the voices. Mr. W. A. Veitch (AVanganui) moved to amend' tho clause by adding tho following paragraph: "Such petition shall set out in full the proposed route of the line, the' estimated cost of tho proposed work, the total unimproved value of the land included in tho proposed rating area, the points at which terminal sidings and stations are to bo fixed, an estimate of the probablo revenue, the names of the persons originating tho petition, and the unimproved value of the land held within the proposed rating area by each such' originator." The Hon. Mr. Fraser said that ho could only conclude that this amend■ment was moved with the object of killing the Bill. It would be the fiino tion of tho board to do what Mr. Veiteh proposed. Tho amendment was. rejected on the voices, as was also another to make it obligatory for the Minister to mako a trial survey of any railway before the constitution of a railway district!.

Mr. Veiteh moved to a proviso that when a railway board raises money to build a railway it should hand over its funds to tho Minister of Public Works, who should build tho railway a,s soon as possible, and then hand it over to the . Minister of Railways, who should administer it in accordance with tho Government Railways Act. Mr. Fraser declared that this amendment also' would kill the Bill. The-.amendment was lost on the yoices. One Man One Vote. Mr. H. G. Ell insisted upon dividing the Committee on a proposal to add to Clause 6, dealing with polls of rate.payers, to decide whether a railway district should be set up, that every ratepayer should have one vote only. The clause originally provided that a porperty holder whoso property was worth between £1000 and £2000 should havo two votes; more than £2000, three votes; under £1000, one vote. The amendment was defeated by 9 votes to 21. Mr. G. Witty, then . moved to strike out altogether tllie clause providing for .plural voting. The amondment was lost on the voices. Unimproved Value. After this'amendment was disposed of unobstructed progress was made until Clauso 43, dealing with rating, was reached, when Mr. Veiteh moved to amend it to provide that all rating should be on the unimproved value only. . Tho amendment was defeated on tho voices. On tho same clause, in that part of it dealing with the classification of land for rating, Mr. Voitch moved to add a proviso that no city, borough, or town district should be included in more than one rating district. Ho subsequently withdrew his amendment, however, the Committee .having had tho Minister's assurance that this and other matters in the clause would he reconsidered. The clause was passed nnamended. Clause 90 was struck out on the motion of the Minister. This makes it quite clear that a railway built under the Act cannot pass to any private company. The Bill was reported with amendments. Rangitaiki Land Drainage. The. Rangitaiki Land, Drainage Bill was passed through Committee without amendment. , The House rose at 1.45 a.m.