The Taihape Daily Times AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1920. NEW RAILWAY ROUTES.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume XII, Issue 3626, 12 November 1920, Page 4

The Taihape Daily Times AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE.

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1920. NEW RAILWAY ROUTES.

With which is incorporated "The Taihape Post and Waimarino News."

In the present session, as in all past sessions of Parliament, while the Publie Works estimates and allocations are in the making, there has been the usual voicing of constituency needs. Several members have shown a parochialism in their importunities which is, in most cases, derogatory to the best that is achievable in the Dominion's interest. The matter of railways is always to the front; some members will persist in demands for railway changes which are nothing more than a choice of convenience. Eailways already exist, but they are not running just where some present members of Parliament think they should go, and they want these lines scrapped and a new route selected in place thereof. Of course, those old railway routes were largely chosen by members of Parliament in the days when the 'first surveys were being made. The railway over the Rimutakas from Wellington to the Wairarapa was a much-discussed work in its. day. The country where present members desire the line was not then settled, and not likely to be for long into the future, while the land, 05 the Berth side of the hills was already iii possession, and was j the home of leading politicians of that time. Prominent amongst those old I Parliamentarians were Mr. Featherston, Mr. Henry Bunny, A. W. Renalls, and others: Sir Walter (then plain Mr) Buchanan may have had some voice in fixing the route of the Wellington— Wairarapa line. But is it right or reasonable that a second line of railway should now be constructed simply because political prestrge predominates in another direction? If so, are old railways to be abandoned and new ortfcs laid down to suit the pockets and convenience of members of Parliament from time to 'time? Of course, such a policy would of necessity keep a large part of New Zealand from having any railways, at all. Those most closely interested in the Wellington —Wairarapa line no doubt took a large part in selecting the route, and it seems that those who are most interested in that line to-day should be satisfied with the selection until such time as the Government is in a financial position to scrap one line and build another. The first claim upon the State must in all common fairness come from closelysettled, richly producing centres which have no railways, and have but indifferent roads. Before ore section of the community is allowed to practice fastidiousness about its railways, railless and almost roadless settled country should have means of communication made so that the utmost production of these things whereby the community lives could, be assured. The other railway duplication of particular note asked for is that over the Paekakariki hill. This lino, which has become part of the North Islam? Mam TrunL railway, was not a political railway; it was constructed by a private company, and, no doubt., the engineers employed were enjoined to take the most direct route, so long as it did not involve any great engineering difficulties. An important aspect of this privatelyowned railway is that the time came when the company was anxious to sell, and the State was equally desirous to buy it. And if this does not constitute one, of the strongest arguments against the coiistruction of private railways, it is-difficult to understand what objection there can be to a go-as-you-please policy of private; railway making. The point is that the Manawatu railway was put where it was most advantageous to the ManawatU Bailway Company, and although development of the country has since shown 'that it would be more acceptable if it took some other course to-day, there seems no earthly reason for spending huge sums of money in railway chopping and changing while half th? country is' without railways altogether. Mr. R. W. Smith, member for Waimarino, emphatically protested against deviations for mere convenience while those people without any

railways should have the State's first consideration. Mt. Smith went so far as to say that "if the Minister or Government gives way to those who 1 are agitating for the Riniutaka and j Paekakariki deviations before the more j urgent lines are constructed, • it would j amount to a scandal." No doubt Mr. i Smith had in mind the fact that while agitators were asking the Government to spend huge sums of money on deviations of railways, the settlers in his electorate were paying out of their own poclfets for the formation and metalling of roads, and even the building of bridges over dangerous rivers to give them ingress and egress that makes marketing of their productions practicable. We certainly are in full agreement with Mr. Smith's views on railway construction, as voiced in Parliament, and we likewise think that no Minister of Public Works will consent to almost crushing expenditure on deviations while a large proportion of productive country is not served by any railway at all, and is but indifferently roaded.