CO885-(11-12) — Page 246

171

FENBLIC

7 4 17 1

PECORD OFFICE

Reference -

C.O.882/1

12

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- „COPTRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON,

200

Line should be postponed until the end of the 1930-31 crop season, and this was approved by Lord Fassfield, in bis despatch, No. 186 of the 16th August, 1930.* In the foregoing circumstances there appear to be strong reasons why both the above Lines should be closed as recommended by the Commissioners.

3. The Commissioners point out that, while the Goods Service on the railway pays, there is a heavy loss on the Passenger Ser- vices. Apart altogether from the overhead charges the direct cost of moving passenger traffic is Rs. 57,000 more than the receipts from tickets. The Commissioners consider that the only way of securing definite reduction in the present excessive cost of the Railway Department is on the general basis of closing down pas- senger services; but they suggest that a restricted service might be operated for business people, school children, etc., between Port Louis and Curepipe.

4. The receipts from passenger traffic have fallen from Rs. 2,969,666 in 1923-24 to Rs. 606,400 in 1930-31, while the esti mated receipts for 1931-32 are even smaller than the receipts in 1930-31. There has been a successive reduction every year since 1923-24, and it would appear that even if the railway is not closed for passenger traffic, the receipts from passenger services will drop to a negligible amount in the course of 2 or 3 years I can see no justification for dissenting from the Commissioners, if the matter is regarded from a purely commercial standpoint; but you point out, in paragraph 22 of your despatch of the 4th of November, that the Commissioners' recommendations will necessitate the discharge of some 800 men for whom no alternative employment is available, and you recommend in paragraph 24 that the reduction of the rail- way to a goods level should be spread over a period of two or three years instead of one year as contemplated by the Commissioners.

5. On page 137 the Commissioners recommend that regulations should be enforced providing that no road vehicle with a registered tare weight exceeding 1 ton should be permitted to transport certain commodities on certain of the main roads, presumably those roads which run parallel to a railway. The intention no doubt is to prevent the railway losing more of its goods traffic. I am advised that there would be no objection to some such limitation, but that the limit of tare weight proposed, namely, one ton, is open to criticism, as the paying load which such a vehicle could carry would not be greater than 15 cwt. Moreover, there are only two or three firms which build lorries with so low a tare weight.

6. As regards the Railways, I am in general agreement with the proposals of the Financial Commissioners. I have already approved the carrying out of the first stage of the scheme prepared by the General Manager, and I must leave to your discretion how * C. 74546/30 [No. 20]: not printed.

201

far you proceed with the further stages with the eventual object of abandoning all the passenger services of the railway with the exception of the suburban services between Port Louis and Cure- pipe.

7. I recognize with regret that the railway retrenchments must lead to some increase in unemployment, and that the volume of this will probably be swelled by other Government retrenchments and the existing depression in the island. It may be necessary in these circumstances to consider what measures may be required for the relief of this unemployment, and you have suggested the carrying out of some kind of relief works as a preferable measure to any payment of direct unemployment relief. You have further suggested that the proposed Harbour works might be carried out as such a means of relieving unemployment.

8. I have, however, come to the conclusion that, as indicated by the Commissioners, there is no case for the immediate execution of the Harbour works on their merits, bearing in mind the con- siderable local opposition to the scheme as a whole, including the establishment of a Harbour Trust, and the difficulty of financing the project. It may be taken as certain that the Colonial Develop- ment Fund, even if it were prepared to assist at all, could not do more than pay the interest for a limited period on a loan to be raised by the Government of Mauritius, or under the guarantee of that Government, and I cannot think that it would be wise for the Colonial Government to raise any further loans at present, or that it would be easy for it to do so on favourable terms in its present financial condition. From the point of view of unem- ployment relief, the Harbour works do not seem to be a suitable undertaking. They are much too big for such a purpose, and could not be undertaken in sections as the state of employment required.

9. I consider, therefore, that the problem of unemployment arising from Railway retrenchment and other causes must be dealt with separately. If relief works are necessary, I suggest that it might be better to take up the Port Louis drainage scheme, or to resume work on the La Nicoliere irrigation works. Further consideration of the proposed Harbour works must be postponed until more prosperous times.

10. I will address you as regards the Commissioners' proposals for a change in the Railway budgetary system in connexion with Chapter XII of the Report (Budget Form and Procedure).

I have, &c.,

P. CUNLIFFE LISTER.