"ENTIRELY ILLOGICAL"

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 119, 22 May 1928, Page 9

"ENTIRELY ILLOGICAL"

CITY TRANSPORT CONTROL

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE VIEW

INJUSTICE TO OUTER AREAS

EVIDENCE BY MR. LUNN.

Opposition to the suggested transport board, except as a step in the direction of a general metroplitan board, was the attitude adopted by Mr. L. Alfred Eady, a member of the Auckland City Council, in evidence at the Transport Commission to-day. Mr. J. S. Barion, S.M., presided, and had associated with him on the commission being Messrs. W. G. T. Goodman and A. Edward. Messrs. J. Stanton represented the City Council, and Messrs. E. H. Northcroft, V. R. Meredith, H. M. Rogerson and J. M. Melville the outside local bodies.

Under cross-examination by Mr. Stanton, Mr. Eady said that he was a supporter of the Greater Auckland movement, but with modifications, which made it practically equivalent to the metropolitan scheme put forward by the Citizens' Committee.

Mr. Stanton: Do you desire to recede from the position you took up when you opposed the proposed water board in evidence last May?

Witness replied that his ideas had changed somewhat, ns the possibilities of metroplitan control over the extended area were investigated. He added that lie would oppose the formation of a transport hoard on the same ground as he opposed a water board, because it would further complicate the already intricate system of local government in Auckland.

The Chairman: A year ago you strongly advocated amalgamation of the contiguous boroughs with the city. Now you are opposed to that. How do you account for the change of view? Witness: I supported the system of amalgamations for the same reason as I now support the metropolitan board scheme. In the past twelve months I have seen the unwisdom of the virtual disenfranchisetnent of the outer areas upon recent amalgamtions. Mr. Eady was given permission to defer the conclusion of his evidence until a later stage. 7 Dissatisfaction Exaggerated. Alfred George Lunn, ex-president of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce, said that whatever cause there may have been for dissatisfaction on the ground that the transport services provided by the City Council had not always been for the benefit of the outlying area?, the idea that the interests of suburban

residents had been sacrificed appeared to have been exaggerated. It seemed entirely illogical, however, that a City Council controlling an area of less than ten thousand acres should become vested with the jurisdiction of all transport matters, ferries and railways excluded, over an area from six to eight times a* large.

"The problem does not arise in Wellington or Dunedin," continued Mr. Lunn. "because suburban local governing bodies have amalgamated with the city, but in the case of Auckland it is the general feeling of the commercial community that ft public trading utility like transport, operating both in the city and in suburban local governing areas, should be in the hands of a permanent commission or elective board representative of the whole metropolitan area and not merely the area comprised within the city boundaries." Witness considered that a board, as suggested) should be free from control by any single local authority, and thai its members should be selected for their special qualifications for controlling transport. City Ratepayers' Attitude. That the question of extension of transport facilities to the outer area, was dependent upon the favourable vote of city ratepayers on a loan proposal was the position referred to by Mr. Lunn. in erpressinjr the view that the majority of the city ratepayers were alreadv adequately provided with transport facili ties, and would not vote in favour of tfamwny extensions. H<* added tha* there wrp, at the present time, greater possibilities than in the past of extensions provin" unroimmerative. and. therefore, burdensome to the citv. bp' not to theoorr + °r suburban areas mainlconcerned. This, he submitted, ha'' accentiintp<l tbo <rrevar>ce of out«*~ areas aeainst, city control, and an ad ditional prripvanee arose from the fae* that tb" Citv Council h«d been larsrelv responsible for the legislation inimica 1 to motor omnibus traffic, "Many outer areas owe their recen< expansion to the development of bn» transport." Mr. Lunn pa?*. "and the takinf over of such facilities bv th* citv, followed bv a drastic curtailment of transport facilities is regarded a« a*" initiative bv the neonle who have indiicp'l bv the nreviouslv existing services to settle in the outer area." Wellington Comparison. "The straight-out amalgamation of local bodies in Wellington has spread further than in Auckland," said Dr. E. P. Neale, secretary of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce, in a written statement submitted in evidence. He added that the difficulties in the shape of organisation and of securing the necessary co-operation between depart-) fflents had become very serious, it w *s only by offering a very attractive •alary that the Wellington City Council was able to secure the rare type of organising ability in its town clerk that *»uld push a little further forward the P®wt at which the city's organisation Wftsine unwieldy. There was, said the 2giees, a scarcity of organising ability fljibit of WnHling leigQ ppjfljypjitklt

Continuing, Dr. Neale said he believed the point had almost been reached in Auckland where any further major amalgamations would speedily result in the City Council's machinery becoming overburdened unless the council's activities were shorn of some of the trading departments. The need of specialised control and the advantages of it were material, and could be secured only by the separation of specialised trading operations from ordinary administrative functions. Suspicion of Ontaide Bodiss. Regarding the suspicion existing amongst outside local authorities, that there was danger of the City Council not giving due attention in transport matters to the needs of suburban areas controlled »by independent local authorities, Dr. Neale said that such suspicions had not been allayed by the fact that little or nothing was heard about the extension of the Auckland tramway system to Avondale until that borough's amalgamation with the city became a live issue. The extension did i.ot figure in the council's last loan proposals submitted to the city ratepayers, although it had since definitely become part of the council's policy. Such an extension would not be wise, he added, and suggests that the City Council does not always take as long a view as it might in transport matters. Suburban Railways Programme.

The witness referred to the Railway Department's programme for electrification of the Auckland suburban railways, and to Messrs. Merz and McLellan's report upon the Bcheme. The proposals would bring Morningside, Mount Albert, and Avondale within a quarter of an hour of the city, which was considerably less than half the time occupied by the tram to the same point, so that the proposed extension of the city's tramways system in direct competition with what must, inevitably, from the point of view of residents of the district to be served, except those very remote from the railway station, be regarded as the more efficient service, must be viewed with the utmost caution, especially as the report of the electrical experts contemplated the running of a service by train which involved a frequent headway. "The relation of the City Council to the Railway Department in this matter," Dr. Neale submitted, "is almost exactly parallel to that between the buses and the City Council three years ago, and the proposal for the extension of tin Mount Albert tram to Avondale in competition with the railway is in almost every respect inconsistent with the City Council's attitude towards the bus competition. In any transport 'Oard that might be set up provision would require to be made for the proper co-ordination of its activities with those of the Railway Department." (Proceeding.)