DEPARTMENT OF ALL WORKS

Hokitika Guardian, 27 December 1930, Page 6

DEPARTMENT OF ALL WORKS

tHE RAILWAYS’ BURDENS.

(Associated Chambers of Commerce)

When, reviewing the conditions of the Railway Department’s finance it should be borne in mind that under political control, which has endured for some thirty-six or thirty-seven years, the Department never has been run on business lines. It has been left to the whims and fads of the contending politicians, first of one party and then of another, until it has practically lost all continuity or definite purpose. Confusion and inefficiency have been the inevitable results. In a properly conducted private business of. any magnitude the revenue and expenditure of its various departments are regularly brought to account. If any department shows a loss upon the year’s operations, it is the duty of the management to examine the facts and determine whether this Department shall be given another opportunity to justify itself, perhaps under improved conditions, or close down. With Government affairs in this country the proceedings are different. The 1 ailways here are auxiliaries of a dozen other departmAntf and are called upon to bear part of the burdens of them all, either at lio charge at all or at wholly inadequate rates. A few instances of this kind of thing may not be out of place here. Concessions in fares are made to certain favoured classes of passengers, who Cost the country at least as much as do paying travellers. Workers are carried during certain parts of the day at fares entailing a heavy loss to the Department, while inferentially non-workers, pay much higher rates. The recent Railway Commission recommended reforms in this respect which alone would bring to the Department additional revenue to the extent of £22,000. Road metal, again is carried for the local bodies at an utterly unremunbrative rate to be used in forming highways on which inotors and lorries will enter into competition with the railways. Much produce, suofc as grain, potatoes, firewood, straw, coal, cement, bricks, tiles, fruit, vegetables, artificial manures and so forth are carried on the railways at lower rates than is ordinary merchandise, though there can be little, if any, difference between the cost of handling them. The Railway Commission has made recommendations here which are estimated if applied, to produce additional revenue to the extent of about £270,000.

There appears to be some difference of opinion between the Post and Telegraph Department and the Railway Department as to what should be charged for the carriage of mails and mail parcels and so far the Post and Telegraph Department seems to have got rather the better of the controversy. In March 1925, 5520 rail wagons were employed in the carriage of mail matter, with a wagon mileage of 1,015,924 miles. The number of wagons in service in March 1930 was i 0,686 with a wagon mileage of 1,840,852 miles, for which no payment was made to the, Railway Department. In November 1929 tallies were taken and it was'ascertained that the amount due to the Railway Department for the carriage of mails at full parcel rates, including a charge for wagons,- would be £212,811. The Railway Commission now recommends an alteration in the arrangement between the two Departments whereby the Post and Telegraph Department would pay an additional charge of £154,740. In other words, if the Post and Telegraph Department wishes to provide cheap transit for mail matter, the Commission would have the Department bear the requisite freight charges itself and not lean so heavily on flje Railway Department. This seems a prefectly reasonably proposal. There are in the Dominion thirtyfour combined road and rail bridges and towards the upkeep of these .structures the local bodies provide about £4,300 a year. Evidence given before the Railway Commission, however, showed that the charge for road services over railway bridges should be £15,500 a year and the Commission recommended that the Main Highways Board should provide this amount. Apart from this sum, these combined bridges cost the Railway Department £38,000 a year for interest, depreciation and maintenance, and it is an open question whether or not the Transport Board should bear a part of this burden. Many other instances of burdens being placed upon the railways inequitably might be mentioned, but surely enough has to emphasize the need for releasing this great national asset from political interference and placing it under the direction of skilled and independent control.