BUILDING OF RAILWAYS

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 724, 25 July 1929, Page 7

BUILDING OF RAILWAYS

MR. JONES CRITICISES GOVERNMENT demand for investigation (TBB BUS'S Parliamentary Reporter) PARLIAMENT BLDGS., Wed. A vigorous attack on the Government’s railway policy was made in the House of Representatives tonight by Mr. D. Jones (Mid-Canterbury) in carrying 'on the Reform barrage in the Ad-dress-in-Reply debate. Regarding the Palmerston North deviation, Mr. Jones sand that Mr. Coates's demand for definite reports •and information had not been met by the Government. The Hon. W. B. Taverner. in his Address-iu-Reply ,speech had kept clear of railways, and if it had not been for an extension he would not have touched on railways. He had almost avoided Palmerston North. What he had said was a half truth. A credit of £150,C00 to £200,000 was hidden from, the House and from the country. He carefully concealed the fact that Palmerston North was the nerve centre of the North Island for goods traffic. DEVIATION NECESSARY Mr. Jones quoted the late manager of railways, Mr. R. W. McVilly, and Mr. F. W. McLean, late chief engineer of railways, supporting the claim at the investigation that the deviation was absolutely necessary. Mr. MeTilly had said the present position was equal to a loss of 22,000 wagons for one day each year. Why had the floverjjment not placed evidence of the reasons for the stoppage before the House? Continuing. Mr. Jones said that no evidence of expert advice on the Taupp line had been advanced. Regarding the South Trunk, he asked why was the line not finished years ago. The Prime Minister had said that he favoured the line in 1011, and had no chance to carry the work out. In 1900 the line had been begun and not finished, at a time when wages and prices were low-. In 1911 the prime Minister had spent £151,600 on the Midland, Nelson, Reefton, Oliva and Bealey lines. If the South Trunk tyas so necesasry, why was it. not completed then. Mr. Jones then passed on to the remarks of Mr. H. Atmore, who in 1912 as an Independent had criticised the Liberal Government for raising wages on public works by a princely 2Jd on the eve of an election. The policy in the United Party's manifesto was that of an irresponsible body without facts. The Hon. J. B. Donald had expressed the Government's willingness to submit to an inquiry on railways and the Hon. G. W. Forbes had approved of the committee of the House to inquire into Public Woris expenditure. Was he in favour of that now? That w-as the idea of the Reform Party. The question was not one of the South Trunk but of the whole railway system of the Dominion. The Prime Minister did not know whether railways would coat £10,000.000 or £30,000,000. Mr. Jones appealed, amid laughter, to the Labour Party, as the ‘ power party" of the House. Was the Labour Party going to hang round the neck of the working man of the country £30,000,000 worth of expenditure? Mr. R. Semple (Wellington South): We will show you. A Voice: Are you in favour of the South Island railway? A Labour Interjector: He doesu't know where he is? Why. when unemployment was worse in 1908 than now, continued, Mr. Jones, did not the Prime Minister put some ginger into the South Trunk line? He referred to the faulty construction methods, and said that Mr. Coates had introduced business methods into railway construction.

Sir Joseph Ward: Are you supporting the railway? Mr. Jones: I support no railway without an investigat .on. I have never said a word about supporting the line or not. He said the United Party iu its railway policy was going against the direct voice of the people. Mr. Jones went on to refer to the unconstitutional methods of starting the line without Parliamentary sanction. According to Sir Joseph Ward's statement it would be better to spend fhe money in the earthquake area. (Hear, hear.)