The Parliamentary Debate on "Vaile's Stage System."

(See Hansard, 24th of July, 1902, No. 7, page 603.)

The following is the petition which led to this debate. It was presented by Mr. W. F. Massey, and dealt with and reported 011 by the following Railways Committee:—Mr. Flatman, Mr. Lawry, Mr. Massey, Mr. McGuire, Mr. R. McKenzie, Mr. G. W. Russell, Mr. Sidey, Mr. Tanner, Mr. J. W. Thomson, and Hon. Sir J. G. Ward. It will be seen that in this petition I have been careful to repeat all the charges I made against the administration of our railways in the paper I read before the Congress of Chambers of Commerce held in Wellington on 4th February, 1902:—

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives of the Colony of New Zealand in Parliament assembled.

The Petition of Samuel Vaile of Auckland humbly sheweth—

1.	That for the last twenty years your petitioner has been a close student of Railway Administration as practised in many parts of the world, and more particularly in New Zealand, and is the inventor of the Stage or Zone system.
2.	That your petitioner as a citizen of New Zealand feels aggrieved at the great and yearly increasing loss made on the railways of this Colony.
3.	That at a meeting of delegates from all the principal Chambers of Commerce in New Zealand, held in Wellington in February, 1902, your petitioner read a paper on the Railways of New Zealand, a copy of which is hereto attached.
4.	That this paper formed part of the proceedings of the said Congress of Chambers of Commerce, was accepted, and ordered to be printed. The Official Report of the said Congress was printed by the Government Printer, but by some means and for some purpose your petitioner's paper was excluded from the said Report.
5.	That the facts stated in that paper as regards the administration of our railways are all taken from the Annual Reports on Working Railways as issued by the Government.page 2
6.	That your petitioner says that in the said paper he has proved that in the period 1897 to 1901 inclusive the real rate of interest earned by our railways was not more than £2 12s. 2d., £2 3s., £2 1s. 9d., £2 os. 2d., £1 10s., instead of £3 3s. 10d., £3 4s. 10d, £3 5s. 10d., £3 8s. 5d., and £3 9s. 8d, which the Railway Department claims to have earned.
7.	That your petitioner says that the higher rate of interest said to be earned is made to appear by omitting to charge the Revenue Account with interest on moneys expended on lines under construction, as was formerly done; by charging to Capital Account large sums for "Additions to Open Lines," instead of to Revenue Account as formerly; and also by taking credit for all Government passengers and tonnage carried over the lines as so much revenue earned, this charge having been made only since 1896, prior to which period these items were carried free.
8.	That your petitioner says he is not concerned to enquire whether interest on "Unopened Lines" and sums spent on "Additions to Open Lines "should rightly be charged to Capital Account, but he says that formerly these items were charged to Revenue Account Your petitioner further says that the Account, "Additions to Open Lines" was introduced by the late Railway Commissioners in 1891, when they charged to this Account £12,927; and that from this amount it has grown to a vote of £800,000 for the year 1901-2. Your petitioner would further direct the attention of your Honourable House to the fact that for two years (1895 and 1896) after the Government resumed control of the railways, this Account does not appear in the Annual Reports, but it reappears in 1897. Your petitioner further says that it is owing to the rapid increase in this Account that it is made to appear that our railways are yearly i earning an increasing rate of interest, when as a matter of fact that rate is rapidly decreasing, and the resulting loss to the country is now over half a million per annum.
9.	That your petitioner says that the paper referred to in which these facts are fully set forth has now been before the public for six months, and no one has challenged the statements therein made.
10.	That your petitioner says that the facts stated above clearly prove that the financial policy of our Railway Administration is radically wrong, and is rapidly involving the country in a ruinous loss.
11.	That your petitioner says that by altering our railway financial policy by introducing the Stage System the loss now made could easily be converted into a large profit.
12.	Your petitioner would respectfully point out to your Honourable House that the facts stated above and in the paper attached prove that the present system of administering our railways is a serious financial failure, and that it does not meet the requirements of the Colony. And he therefore prays that you will be pleased to take such steps as may be necessary to ensure a full and fair trial of the system of administration known as "Vaile's Stage System," this system, although faultily applied, having proved financially successful in other countries.

And as in duty bound, your petitioner will ever pray.