The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1930.

Hokitika Guardian, 27 February 1930, Page 4

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1930.

Til A NSPORT Pll OB LEMS. 1 he discussion by the New Zealand Society of Civil Engineers at Dunedin, of the problem of the economic aspect of railway transportation , as compared with transportation hy road threw some light, says the Otago Times, on the severely technical questions relating to this matter. It was not, however, productive of any suggestion calculated to provide a solution of the difficulties with which the Railways Department in New Zealand, in common, it appears, with most other railway operators in the world is faced. Railways, particularly in a country such as the Dominion, have had a developmental Value mi thp ]{ast. l:;nit Mr F. J. Jones, ex-Railway Board, who initiated the discussion, contributed figures to show the heavy nature of the losses which the State is now liable to incur through the construction

of railways to do work that could be done more economically by road. This means, in effect, that tiie developmental value of a railroad is counteracted to a large extent when roads exist o-ver the area covered, and in these circumstances it becomes the problem of the railway authorities to endeavour to tssess the value of the railway line in its developmental aspect against the economic losses which may be sustained Such a method of economic adjustment would inevitably lead, as one speaker observed, to the scrapping of a oonsiderabe number of the railway 1 nes in New Zealand. The genu

opinion of the engineers piesent at the meeting-—an opinion that will be shared by the public—was that it would be undesirable that our railway system should be curtailed to any large extlient at least for some years. Bound up with the problem of railway costs is that of the economic position of road transport.. Motor vehicles in several places, have taken from the railways a very appreciable proportion of both their passenger and their goods revenue, but it appears, from the remarks made by the technical experts at the conference that the ultimate cost of transport facilities by road may be very much heavier than is generally imagined, and that the taxpayer may have to pay heavily for the road deterioration brought about by th s new form of transport. The somewhat striking fact was emphasised that very few people have any idea of the actual cost to them, of ownership of a motor car, and it is asserted that the authorities are in a state of similar ignorance respecting the cost of the operation of motor vehicles that are engaged in opposition to the railways. Mr Hr H, Sterling, general manager ot the Railways Department, has drawn ftttettt'ian to the fact that motor transport was taking high-rated goods from the railways, while low-rated goods were left to the department to handle at an inevitable loss, and has indicated that, if this differentiation against the railways continued, some form of retaliation may have to be inaugurated, probably in the shape of increased charges on lower-rated goods. This suggests that in the trial of strength between road and rail transportation the public may be called upon to endure a double taxation burden. Failing the production of an immediate and effective remedy for the .economic distress that is threatening through the losses of the . Railway Department owing to competition, it seems to be necessary that an exhaustive inquiry should be made into the technical and complex aspects of a matter which is of great concern to the taxpayer irrespective of his direct interest in transport questions.