£5,000,000 YEARLY

Hokitika Guardian, 27 March 1931, Page 5

£5,000,000 YEARLY

LOSS ON THE RAILWAYS.

BRITISH EXPERT’S WARNING

WELLINGTON, March 25

“What are you going to do about your railways?” asked Mr W. Roes Jeffreys, a member of th e advisory committee attached to the British Ministry of Transport, in an address on “Transport Problems” yesterday. Mr Rees Jeffreys is a visitor to Wellington and spoke at a Rotary Club gathering.

The relation between rail and road transport was a pressing problem in all parts of the world, said Air Rees Jeffreys. The social evils that- attacked a socialistic State wer e the undue- growth of bureaucracy and the unnecessary expenditure of public funds on purposes which had ceased to be remunerative. There were ab n ”‘ sixty millions invested in New Zealand railways, and when schemes already sanctioned were completed, if would h© nearer seventy millions. Under a conservative system of finance three millions a year should be found to meet depreciation and obsolescence. Adding two millions for interest charges on unpaid capital, New Zealand sustained an annual loss of five millions on its railway ventures. That loss fell on the primary producers—the farmers.

It was clear from the report of the Railway Commission that many miles of railways lmd been built in this country which had never paid and could never hope to pay, said Mr Rees Jeffreys., Many branch liues were bleeding the main line system to death, and in the face of the figures given any Government or authority which authorised any further expenditure out of borrowed money not only undertook a great responsibility to the people of the country, hut to those who were asked to loan the money. Any country which spent money on unremunerative railways under present conditions was imposing a very heavy burden upon its citizens and particularly its primary industries.

TEMPTING BAIT

RAIDING HIGHWAYS FUNDS

FIRM POLICY SPOILT.

.“T think some acknowledgment should be made to the motoring community for their payment- of the heavy taxation which is imposed over and above the taxation -they have paid us citzens, and which they have made toward the cost of this adaptation,” said Mr W. Rees Jeffreys, chairman or the British Roatki Improvement Asociatiori, in an addrests to the Rotary Club recently on transport- problems. . Mr Jeffrey & said be was appointed by Urn British Government n* secretary of the Road Board, the first central department for roads in Great Britain, in 1910. The United States of America set up Federal aid in 1915. New Zealand started its Main Highways Board in 1924, and he found a great record of achievement in this country. He paid a tribute to the work of the Main Highways Board and its officers. They had don© a great work in enabling the travelling pub; lie of the Dominion to make fuller use of the motor vehicle.'

There was always a danger that Governments in difficulties would seek to seize the funds contributed _ by motorists for road purposes and apply them to other purposes, said Mr Rees Jeffreys. The English Royal Commission of Traffic reported: “In our opinion these raids present no redeeming feature; they are bad finance, since the ever-present fear of a recurrence makes it quite impossible for any Minister of Transport to formulate with any degree of confidence a firm policy to be followed in years ahead, and adds greatly to the difficulties of J]ighway authorities. ’ ’ Mr Rees Jeffreys congratulated New Zealand on the soundness of its road finance as compared with its railway finance, as about two millions of money was being found in cash every year to pay off loans for road purposes. Improvements in alignment or location were suitable as unemployment schemes, He had seen some improvement in New Zealand in which the saving in maintenance cost would soon pay for the capital cost of the improvement. In the United States </ America many hundreds of suoh schemes were being carried out, Tt would pay New Zealand -to continue to improve its highway system he -concluded. Great Britain had found that too many highway authorities did not make for efficiency o v cheapness, and it might he found necessary, with due consideration for existing authorities and their employees, to reduce the number of the highways authorities to 10 or 20 0 each Island. Amerijm experience pointed to the same conclusion.