SOUTH ISLAND MAIN TRUNK

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIII, 13 July 1929, Page 4

SOUTH ISLAND MAIN TRUNK

CONSTRUCTION DEFENDED

SPEECH IN HOUSE OF REPRESEN. TATIVES

BY MR. E. F. HEALY (By Telegraph) (From "The Mail’s” Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, lit h July. Facts and estimates iii justification of the South Island Main Trunk railway wero produced at length by Mr E. F. Healy (Wairau) in tlio House of Representatives yesterday. Defending the action of the Government in extending the railway line, Mr Healy said it would open up some fine country. Yet they found an agitation being worked up in opposition to it, headed by the Union Company. He asked where the Marlborough district would be to-day if it had not been for the North Canterbury line put through by Sir Joseph Ward. ' As a result of the action of the Liberal Government in opening up that country by railway, hundreds of people were now settled where there were before only ten or a dozen settlers. Mr Healy described some of the fine limestone country the proposed new line would pass through, and said it would not need much further manuring. Mr P. Fraser (Wellington. .Central);: ‘'What size are the present holdings?”. Mr Healy said there were 920,000 acres of land available for closer settlement. He . went on to refer to other areas in the vicinity of Blenheim. Mr D. Jones (Mid-Canterbury): “You caii get all that without a railway.” Mr Healy differed with the interjector. 1 : , The Leader of the 'Opposition (the Right Hon. J. G. Coates): “But you have got. a railway there.” Mr, Healy: “We are isolated on account of our markets. We lose 4s on every sheep we send to the works, and 6s on'every store sheep sent to Canterbury.”, Mr Jones: “Don’t you get the Wellington, price?” Mr Healy: “No, we don’t.”

EXTENT OF SETTLEMENT LANDS

The speaker went on to quote figures to indicate tiie extent of aggregation in the district at present. He instanced individual-owned estates of 74,300 acres, 114,300 acres, 52,000 acres, 29,200 acres, 38,000 acres, and 28,000 acres, and said that no less than 515,800 acres were held by. 13 people. Within from two. to .30 miles of Blenheim, 147,330 acres of land, all suitable for closer settlement, were owned by nine persons. Between the Clarence and Conway Rivers there were 254,470 acres of pastoral leases, 112,634 acres of small grazing runs, and 72,000 .acres of large freeholds and 32,000 acres of small freeholds—all beatiful land around the Kaikouras. In another block, one man owned 121,877 acres, another 127,624 acres, and other holdings were: 54,872, 77,350, 52,000, and 130,300. This land was all beautiful country, although some if it was high country. Mr Healy expounded on the virtues of Marlborough’s, producti-. vity, and said the province was capable of closer settlement. He had been returned largely because of his advocacy of the Government’s railway and settlement policies. Mr Healy wanted to know whether Mr Coates was in earnest in sending Mr Girling a telegram in the course of the last election, stating that the line would be built. He was afraid that the telegram was only sent to defeat the speaker, but it did not have 'that effect Tne Leaner of the Opposition (the Right Hon. J. G. Coates): “I think th.V- all the hon. gentleman has to do is to jus.'fy it'on reasonable gro rods. No cue wi l ? then have the slightest objection.'’ Mr Healy: “It is the first railway line Ihn* 1 have heard of for which a balance sheet is required before, it is built.” . :wr Coates: “Oh, no.” Mr Healy said there was no agitation about the construction cf some other lines. “An octopus is behind the opposition to the South Island Main Trunk," he said “and we know wnr. it EASY CONSTRUCTION Mr P. Fraser (Wellington Central): “But the hon. gentleman has no objection to us getting full information?” Mr Healy“l am endeavouring to give it.” He said that no route was an easy one for constructional purposes.* After, quoting the stock statistics for the district, Mr Healy claimed that the lino would carry much of the sheep, cattle, dairy produce, and fish that was at present conveyed by other means to Christchurch. The line would also bo most attractive from a scenic point of view. “What; about the farmers who opposed the line?” queried a Reform member. . v Mr Heaiy replied that no importance was to be attached to the proceedings of a meeting attended by fifteen people. It was like the meetings of the Chambers of Commerce. He would like to know how many attended those meetings and what were their vested interests.. Ho denied that the Minister of Railways had travelled over the route of the proposed railway with the blinds of (his car drawn. A Mr Jones, ho said, had entered into the discussion, a man who was more fortunate than many members of Parliament in drawing over £llOO a year of the people’s money. He wondered whether Mr Jones would care to place his experience against that of Mr Dawson, a former railway manager, who was supporting the project. Mr F. Langstone (Waimarino): “One is an engineer, the other isn’t.” TRAFFIC AND FINANCE Mr Healy estimated that the trip by rail from Christchurch via the proposed route, and across Cook Strait by steamer to Wellington would occupy from 10J, to 11 hours, as compared with from 11 1-4 to 11 3-4 hours by the present ferry service. An average of about 210,000 passengers per annum was carried by the present steamers, and it could be presumed that at_ least twothirds of those would patronise the railway when it was completed. Mr J. A. Nash (Palmerston): “QuesI tion.”

The speaker said that at least they could assume that the railway would carry 105,000 people a year between Wellington and Christchurch, and 10,000 between , Blenheim and Christchurch. He estimated the annual revenue at £250,881, and expenditure, including interest on the cost of £2,300,000, at £237,256, leaving a satisfactory credit balance. The train fare from Picton to Christchurch would be about £1 6s 3d.. Mr C. A. Wilkinson. (Egmont) complimented Mr Healy on the very gallant attempt Ihe had made to defend the railway. He was sorry to say, however, that he could not support the railway ; he wanted a lot more information before agreeing to expend £*2,000,000 of the t;axpayers Y uuSnoy. (Hear, hear.)

Ho regretted that Mr Healy had attacked Mr F. J. Jones, the former chairman of the Railway Board, and said he hoped that no superannuated Public servant would bo debarred from 'contributing opinions and advice on important matters. He could not agree witli the United Party policy in regard to the South Island line. Since 1925416 the losses on the railways . had been progressively £280,000, £544,000, and £781,000 a year, while last year they had amounted to about £1,000,000. These losses, he said, must ho a progressive one; lie could not see that we were going to pick them up. lie urged that before the country was committed to the South Island project a special and urgent inquiry should be made. Colonel TV W. McDonald (Wairarapa): “There have been two inquiries already.” Mr Wilkinson said there had been a revolution in. transport since then. Wo must be up to date./ It was no good spending public money by millions in face of heavy losses year by y<?ar. The taxpayer would find the burden crushing. * The Postmaster-General (the Hon. J. B. Donald) said he believed the revenue from 'the South Island line would produce from passenger, traffic alone three times the revenue of £37,000 a year that had been estimated. .He had inspected the route, and there was a lot of land that could be cut up to good purpose.