FOXTON-SANDON TRAMWAY EXTENSION.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXII, Issue 897, 27 September 1910, Page 4

FOXTON-SANDON TRAMWAY EXTENSION.

The following is a continuation of the Hansard report of the discussion in the House in reference to the petition from a number of local governing bodies, asking the Government to allow the Manawalu County Council to continue the tramway from Pukenui to Greatford. In our last issue we published Mr Craigie’s motion that the Public Petitions Committee’s report on the question do lie on the table and be referred to the Government for favourable consideration. To this Mr Newman moved an amendment that the report and evidence be printed. Portions of the Hon. Mr Millar’s evidence before the committee was also reproduced:—

Mr Duncan : It seems to be a serious thing that the policy of the railways is in the direction of making the lines pay. It appears to be the first consideration, and there is no consideration in the direction of giving the settlers cheaper access to a port. Hon. Mr Millar; That is absolutely incorrect. You cannot show me any part of the world where there are greater facilities for the farmers. If we take the railway charges for Australia we can get a year more than we do now. Mr Duncan: Your reason lor objecting to this connection is that It would divert some of the present traffic from the railways ? Hon. Mr Millar ; Yes. Mr Duncan.: You give no consideration to the fact that the settlers in that part of the district would have a cheaper means of getting their produce to market ? Hon. Mr Millar: It would affect the whole of the main lines. As soon as you agree to certain concessions the people all over the country want the same concessions granted, and that is why we are trying to prevent, as far as possible, coming into competition with Foxton. If we have any trouble with Foxton we will deal with Foxton in the same way that we did with Oamaru. Mr Duncan: I have much sympathy for Foxton. Hon. Mr Millar: You cannot dissociate the Foxton Harbour Board from the Foxton tramway. Mr Nosworthy: The harbour lives on the tram ? Hon. Mr Millar: Yes. Mr Newman: I understand your objection to this is entirely because it would divert traffic to Foxton instead of to Wellington ? Hon. Mr Millar: Yes, a large portion. Mr Newman: It is part of the policy of the Government that such a thing should not be done ? Hon. Mr Millar; Certainly. Mr Newman : I suppose it is part of the policy of the Government to develop marine matters, and it is part of the duty of the Minister of Marine to develop the Dominion’s marine? Hon. Mr Millar: Yes.

Mr Newman: As Minister of Marine, you would consider the advantages to the port oi Foxton ? Hon. Mr Millar: They have a Harbour Board there. We do not interfere with them. The port does not belong to me at all. Foxton is a harbour of New Zealand now, and appears under the Harbours Act as having a Harbour Board. Mr Newman : If this connection were made you would still make it impossible to ship at Foxton in preference to Wellington ?

Hon, Mr Millar: Yes. Mr Newman: It is marvellous. The Government candidate got a few hundred votes in Foxton. The Chairman: Politics do not come into the discussion. Flou. Mr Millar: How can you bring politics into it ? A Government member had it in a Bill, but it was declined by the Government. Mr Newman: He was sorry to have had to inflict all this on the House, but he desired to put on record in clear and unmistakable terms the policy adopted by the Government in order to make the railways pay. He hoped the report and evidence would be printed, because he thought this was a matter of great interest to a large number of people. For the reasons which he had given it was desirable that the report should be printed—it had been taken down in shorthand for that purpose. He hoped the House, in view of the importance of the subject, would support the amendment. Mr Pearce (Patea) said he rose to second the amendment and support it, because it embodied a principle that was of very great interest to the whole of New Zealand. The evidence should certainly be printed, so that the whole of the local bodies in New Zealand could see the position taken up by the Government in the matter of tramways. The whole matter hinged on the principle as to whether, when a local body raised the money and built a tram-line, the Government could prevent the utility of that tramline by refusing to allow it to connect with the railway, and that was what the Government were doing in this case. The local bodies in the district had raised the money and built a tram-line for some eighteen miles, and four or five miles more would connect it with Greatford. If the Government allowed those tour or five miles to be constructed, the produce of the district, which consisted largely of oats, chaff, etc., could be sent up the Main Trunk line to the advantage of the settlers there, and the sawmillers could returntheirtimber. Hewasverymuch surprised at the stand the Minister of Railways took up in saying that Foxton would compete with the

line to Wellington if the con- I uection were allowed. At the present time the distance from Marton to Wanganui was thirtyfive miles. If the tram-line were connected at Greattord the distance from Marton —the junction of the Main Trunk line —to Foxton would be thirty-one miles, so that there was only a difference of four miles, which would result in all that produce going to Wanganui. If it were to be shipped, the facilities at Wanganui were very much better than those at Foxton. Although they had a chance of sending their produce to Wanganui, the Minister of Railways argued that they would send it to Foxton, and not by the Main Trunk line to Wellington. The evidence given before the Committee clearly disclosed that the Government did not consider the settlers of the district at all; they merely considered whether it was going to injure the railway re--1 turns or not. That was the stand the Minister took up in the matter. The district was large and thickly settled, extending some thirty-one miles from Greattord to Foxton. The principle involved was one that the House should carefully scrutinize —namely, as to whether the Government should refuse to allow tramways of that class to connect with the railways to the injury of a whole district. It seemed to him a question ot very large principle. As the Government had decided not to build branch railway-lines, the only course open to the local bodies concerned was to build those lines themselves in the shape of tramways to connect with the main arterial lines of railway. Why should producers be compelled to cart their products long distances ? He certainly would support the evidence being printed, so that the country could see the position the Government had taken up.

Mr Field (Otaki) said he would not detain the House, but he desired to say a word or so to express his sympathy with the settlers who had signed the petitions. He himself had presented one of the petitions, having its origination in the Borough of Foxton. He was glad to find that the Committee had brought down a report recommending the prayer of the petitioners to the Government for favourable consideration. For a long time past he and a number of other members had been trying to get the Government to deviate the Main Trunk line at Levin, and thus throw open a large area of valuable country, and thus serve settlers who were not sufficiently served, or not served at all, by a railway at the present time. This deviation would proceed from Levin by way of Foxton to Greatford, and would absorb the Sandon Tramway and its functions. He was not altogether blaming the Government for delaying this work a little, because he knew it was argued that there were other more important works to be finished before this was taken in hand. In the meantime, the branch railway in question was in abeyance, and he was afraid it would be a considerable time before it was constructed, unless the Government could be got to look more favourably on it. And what were the settlers to do ? They must have connection with the railway if they possibly could, and they had constructed a tramway, which vvas of very great use to the district, but which fell very far short of its utmost usefulness if it were not allowed to join up with the railway. Now, if this tramway had not been in existence he could have understood the Government taking up the position that it was inadvisable to allow a a new tramway to be commenced and constructed, although he was not prepared to say that such an objection would have been justified ; but the tramway being already there, it seemed to him a very small thing and at the same time a very natural thing to ask that the tramway be allowed to continue and connect with the railway as the petitioners desired. The question of competition with the Government railway should not, he thought, enter into consideration at all. It was a question of the convenience of, and saving of expense to, the settlers, and he, as a member lodging a petition from the Foxton Borough on this matter, was entirely in accord with what had been said by other members in support of the prayer of the petition. He could have better understood the Minister’s attitude if he had qualified it by saying that as a condition to allowing the extension of this tramway to be built, and so to connect with the Government railway, an option of purchase over the tramway should be given to the Government. An Hon. Member ; We offered that, Mr Field said that if the offer was a fair one and of such a nature that the Government would not be asked to pay too much for the tramway, and should be getting their full money’s worth, there should have been no objection to the connection with the Government railway. He personally knew the district; he knew the wants of the settlers, and he knew that connection between this tramway and the Government railway was an urgent necessity. If they were in a position of being able to say that in two or three years, or within some other comparatively short period of time, these people would be supplied with a railway such as had been asked for, then that would afford some reason for the Minister’s attitude. If the Government had been able to show to the settlers some good reasons for objecting to the continuation of the tramway the position would have been dif-

ferent, but, as it was, he had heard no good reason given by the Government for the position they had taken up. He trusted that as the result of the Committee’s recommendation the Minister would see his way to grant what he considered was a very reasonable request. {To be continued in our next issue.)