The Evening Star FRIDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1928. PREMATURE CRITICS.

Evening Star, Issue 20049, 14 December 1928, Page 6

The Evening Star FRIDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1928. PREMATURE CRITICS.

The Prime Minister brought down an Appropriation Bill in Parliament yesterday. Its main features are the provision of half a million sterling for railway construction, £200,000 for roads and bridges, and £IOO,OOO for hydro-electric work. Authority was also obtained for an increase in the amount to be applied to acquiring land for closer settlement, making the limit, a million a year. The previous Government had secured authority from the last Parliament for funds to carry on until June, when normally Parliament would have been expected to meet. But Sir Joseph Ward proposes to speed up the rate of development, which in many directions had been allowed to slow down, in one particular case almost to a standstill. Therefore he required additional funds, and these the House authorised him to obtain. This is but a prompt beginning of the policy which he stressed during his election campaign. But some members of the Reform Party were altogether unreasonable in their criticism. They desired the Prime Minister to unfold the whole of his borrowing scheme. As Sir Joseph said in his reply, it is absurd to demand that a tlircc-.day-old Government should produce seventy million sterling at this juncture. Presumably matters in that connection will forthwith be set in train, and the result should nob be expected before the House assembles in Juno, when doubtless the full proposals will be placed before it.

It appears that Sir Joseph Ward himself gave an opening for the criticism to take this unfair turn. Not only did he give a rough outline of the railway construction programme for much further ahead than the next few months, but be gave some indication of the scope of his refinance and new finance for men on the land. More important still, he mentioned a discovery made in his recent investigation of the dominion’s finances, which ho characterised as a bad legacy from his predecessor at the Treasury, Mr Downie Stewart. As to its nature it would be idle, even injurious, for any to speculate; Sir Joseph himsolf said its disclosure would do the country harm. Efforts were made to gam knowledge as to what this ‘ ‘ mysterious obstacle ’ ’ to the fulfilment in its entirety of his seventy million loan scheme in the next decade might be. But the Prime Minister contented himself with saying that no blame attached to Mr Stewart, and he also indicated that the delay involved would only be temporary, and that in the meantime some of the borrowing might need to be internal. There was little justification lor the deductions drawn by Mr Coates and Mr Stewart on Sir Joseph Ward’s modifications, and none whatever for the absurd statement of Mr David Jones that the whole policy of the United Party had boon thrown overboard and that thousands of mortgagors would have their hopes blasted. On the- contrary, those anticipating being able to convert their mortgages should have every reason to take renewed courage from Sir Joseph had to say in this connection. Among the railway construction works mentioned by Sir Joseph Ward was the bridging of the gap between the railheads of the South Island Main Trunk line. It was not to bo expected that this p’ould pass without depreciatory comment by North Island members. Mr Coates expressed tbe opinion that completion would never pay, and would remain a permanent charge on the country. In view of the report of the Fay-Raven Commission of 1924 (to which reference was made in yesterday’s debate.) it is strange to hear Mr Coates speaking thus, tor be was in his capacity of Minister of Railways and of Public Works largely instrumental in having that Commission appointee!. The following is an extract from the report“ The location and order of construction of now lines for developmental purposes are questions upon which wo do not feel competent to express a decided opinion; only those who know the country and its possibilities are competent to offer suggestions of value upon these subjects. There, is, however, one important link in the chain of railway communication fipon which we think it desirable to express an opinion—viz., that of the gap between Ward and Parnassus. It is not so much in the local advantage of such a line that we view its completion as of greater importance than some other railways upon which considerable sums have been spent; it is because of the possibilities offered by its construction of making a complete railway transport system between all parts of the North and South Islands without change of carriage in the case of passengers or break of bulk or delay in the incidence of goods traffic that we advocate its construction.”