ARAPUNI CRITICISM

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1025, 16 July 1930, Page 13

ARAPUNI CRITICISM

MR. F. LYE WANTS ROYAL COMMISSION PRIVATE INFORMATION THE SUN'S Parliamentary Reporter WELLINGTON, Tuesday. Strong criticism of the state of affairs at Arapuni was voiced by a Government member. Mr. F. Lye (Waikato), in his speech in the House of Representatives today during the Address-in-Reply debate. Mr. Lye supported the Leader of the Opposition, the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates, in his contention that a Royal Qommissiou should investigate the whole position. Mr. Lye said that he agreed with Mr. Coates concerning a Royal Commission. He had sufficient material in two letters he had received from a man who had been an overseer at Arapuni to create considerable uneasiness among the public as to the position. However, he was not going to sit in judgment on the engineer-in-chief ti the Public Works Department, Mr. F. W. Furkert, but he did believe that the whole question should be investigated so that the public could learn what might have been done and what should be done to safeguard the public money that had been invested in the scheme.

Mr. A. M. Samuel (Reform Thames): You are. against a Parliamentary committee?

Mr. Lye said he was, and he believed that those who made the inveStiga tions should be men outside the Public Works Department. He was sure that a great deal of information concerning Arapuni had not gone to the Public Works Department, or if it had it had been hushed up. His informant was an ex-overseer who was prepared > o go before any committee and giv day and date for the development of faults on the work. He could substantiate all he had said, and had kept a diary while he was on the job. “I believe I am justified,” said Mr. Lye, “in saying that the people in the lower reaches of the Waikato ran a very grave risk because of the rotten nature of the country at Arapuni.” A Reformer: Are you agreeable to a jfidge of the Supreme Court being chairman cf the commission? Mr. Lye: I am not prepared to state that, but I believe there should be a Royal Commission. ENGINEERS BLAMED NO NEED FOR COMMISSION,’ SAYS J. S. FLETCHER POLITICIANS EXCUSED THE SUXS Parliamentary Reporter WELLINGTON, Tuesday. That there was no need for a Royal Commission to inquire into Arapuni was the contention of Mr. J. S. Fletcher i Independent—Grey Lynn), in his Address-in-Reply speech this evening. “Who cares about hanging the hides of politicians on the fence? he asked. The explanation of the whole ques- , tion, he claimed, lay in one sentence in the reply to a question asked bv him last session concerning Ihe i abandonment ot the Arapuni contract by Armstrong. Whitworth. The sentence was, “as there was no evidence of what the contractors originally contemplated it would be impossible to check what work was allowed for by them.” That meant that there were no plans and specifications and the letter was signed “F. W. Furkert." The fault lay not with the politicians but with the engineers.