PARTY TELEPHONES.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 54, Issue 97, 3 February 1934, Page 3

PARTY TELEPHONES.

LOW COST IN NEW ZEALAND. NEW, BRITISH SCHEME. (Special to the "Guardian.") WELLINGTON, February 1. The fact that telephone service in Great Britain cost the user more than it did in New Zealand was stressed by the Postmaster-General (the Hon. Adam Hamilton) when his attention was called to a recent announcement by the British Postmaster-General (Sir Kingsley Wood) that it was proposed to introduce in England a cheaper telephone service for the small subscriber, to be known as the "group service" system. In a .statement, Mr Hamilton said it was a fact that even under the reduced cost of the group service system, in which as many as eight subscribers would share one telephone line, the cost to each .subscriber for an eighth share in the line would, be more than the cost to the individual in New Zealand for a fourth share in a four-party line. "The four-party line residential subscriber in Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, or Dunedin pays £6 per annum, and the number of calls that he may make in the course of a year is unlimited," said Mr Hamilton. "In England, even under the cheapened group system, each call is charged for at the rate of Id or 2d, according to the distance away of the called telephone, and on top of that the subscriber is required to pay a ground rental of £3 10s per annum.

"Hence a 'group' subscriber in England who makes no more than two calls a day has to pay in ground rental and calling lees' a total of probably not less than £7 per annum. Therefore in England for £7 per annum eight people have to share one telephone line, whereas in New Zealand for so little as £G per annum one telephone line need be shared by no more than four people. In the smaller towns in New Zealand the .rate for fourparty service is even cheaper. "The principal distinction between the new British group system and the existing New Zealand party-line system is that in England complete secrecy is enjoyed by each 'group' subscriber, whereas in New Zealand partyline subscribers (automatic) enjoy only partial secrecy. But in giving complete secrecy, Great Britain has had to forego the-ad vantage of the partylino subscribers being able to communicate one with another. This facility, which is present in the New Zealand system, is of considerable value, and it would be a serious disability for four friends sharing a partyline not to be able to communicate one with another." Mr Hamilton said that for present and future needs New Zealand was already fully provided with efficient party-line apparatus, and even if the British system offered distinct advantages, the bringing of it into operation in New Zealand would involve so much capital expenditure as to be prohibitive, and moreover it would necessitate the scrapping of the present party-line plant and the replacing of it by even more complicated plant at greater cost with little, if any, benefit either to the subscriber or to the department. Such a change in New Zealand would make for "dearer telephones."