The Dominion. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER, 2, 1920. PUBLIC WORKS POLICY

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 32, 2 November 1920, Page 6

The Dominion. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER, 2, 1920. PUBLIC WORKS POLICY

The recent Public Works debate in the House of liepresentatives was remarkable chiefly for the consistency with which many members who spoke evaded or clouded the issues really raised regarding the policy of concentrating on works in their order of importance. It is plain enough, however, that what Parliament and the country are ' asked to do is not examine a policy of concentration in full operation, but to decide whether the promising initial steps that have been taken: in establishing such a policy arc to bo followed up as enterprisingly as the Minister. ' of Public Wouks • evidently desires they should be. No one could pretend that the advantages (ft concentration , are- satisfactorily demonstrated in the schedule of railway and other works as it stands, but .this is fully explained by the fact "that Me. Coates, when he took office last year inherited the results of the policy pursued by a long succession of Governments under which economy and efficiency in financing and p.rosecuting development work were subordinated to vote-catching and the sweetening of electorates.. The task of the present Minister is, of course, made much more difficult by this embarrassing legacy, and he is on that account entitled to all the_ more credit for having turned his back on old methods and mapped out others which promise very much better results. The reality of his immediate difficulties ought not to be allowed to obscure the fact that, the policy he is working out offers' the Dominion tremendous advantages. As compared with the methods now employed, the effective concentration of national resources available for development work will mean not only that given -undertakings will be completed more rapidly, and at reduced cost, but that the total amount of work carried out in a stated period will be increased. It is evidently not a good reason for_ criticising the policy of concentration in itis early stages that these benefits will not be . realised in full measure for some to come. In point of fact, however, the programme outlined by the Minister promises _ quite _ as rapid progress in the right direction as could have been anticipated. As regards railway works, for instance, he has shown that out of eighteen lines, great and small, under construction, two,_ if not three, are to be/stopped, while five are to bo completed by March next, and two more, it is hoped, within two years. The next year or two thus ought to witness a substantial reduction in tbe number of railways under construction, and the' Minister has stated that in dealing with those that remain he will first concentrate his resources on the lines that will open up and develop the greatest areas of now country. Presumably he will set his face firmly against the iuthorisation of new lines all over the country which would have been made as a matter of course during tho Jrcxt year or two had tho old conditions continued,' and will insist that no railway construction work shall henceforth bo undertaken except m conditions that will permit its reasonably expeditious completion.

Those who adopt a national as distinct from a parochial standpoint will whole-heartedly approve and support progress on these lines. At the same' timo a policy of concentration, if it is to succeed, must go hand in hand with a wise, and well-considered selection of tho works on which resources are to be concentrated.' It is the essence of sound concentration that it should apply to undertakings which are indisputably entitled to take preccdence over others in point of urgencv and desirability. The*difficulties liable to arise in this connection are illustrated in tho outcry raised in Parliament against the alleged favouritism extended to Auckland province. The GoTCrtiment ought to avoid carefully giving any real ground for suspicions of_ this nature, the more so sinco, quite apart from what was said on the subject the other night m Parliament, there is un(Jsubtedly a widespread feeling throughout the country that Auckland has been unduly favoured in the allocation of public expenditure. No doubt it is a difficult matter to hold the balance fairly as between the northern • province, with ; ts apparently unsatiable demands, and the rest of the Dominion, and this strengthens the 'strong case that is to be made out on other grounds for delegating the. detail allocation of public works expenditure to a non-political authority—a board of experts competent to place development works in their order of importance from the standpoint of national requirementb and to allocate expenditure with an eyo to speedy and profitable results. The Minister of Public) Works has already stated that it is proposed to set up an advisory board of business men to advise the

Government _on various questions conncctecl with the business management of its jDower undertakings, T,hc really 'effective development of the policy of concentration demands that a board of somewhat similar character, but with a wider scope ui' membership, should be set up to consider and report publicly upon the most effective utilisation of the fuucls voted by Parliament for road and railway construction. This reform, which we have often advocated, need not infringe upon the authority of Parliament or the Minister of Public Wohks. Fortified by independent expert advice, based solely on the merits of the case, both Parliament and the Minister would be happily released from an enormous pressure by paro chial interests, or at all ' events would be very much better placed than they are now to disregard this pressure. It is on these lines'also that the most effective means would be taken of removing any grounds for such suspicions of favouritism as have been rather widely awnkent fi y ,,?° $? cent ancl c "' - 'rent scale of Public Works expenditure in Auckland province.