RAILWAYS AND SHIPPING

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21244, 16 August 1934, Page 12

RAILWAYS AND SHIPPING

♦ UNFAIR COMPETITION ALLEGED BILL Kl/LED GIT OF ORDER •fjlts'tf IBSOCtiIIOK 3ELKOHAU.) WELLINGTON, August 35. In the House of Representatives, when (he Transport Amendment Bill, introduced by Mr V/. A. Veiteh (Ind., Wanganui), was called, the Speaker Kaid the bill affected the rights of the C'rown, and could not be allowed to pa.-s. Tiie House aliowed Mr Veitch to move Ihe second reading. Mr Veitch referred to the competition between coastal shipping services and the Kailway Board, on the lines nf his speech when introducing the measure, lie said the secondary ports of Ihe Dominion were severely affected. Mr \V. E. Barnard (Lab., Napier) also spoke of the effect of railway competition 011 small ports. He said the Government should immediately consider the best possible measures for bringing about co-ordination between all forms of transport. ! Mr W. J. Eroadfoot (C.. Waitomo) j considered that the co-ordination of 1 overseas shipping should also be considered, to obviate vessels having to call at so many small ports. Mr A. Stuart (C.. Rangitiki) said that if coastal shipping was going to be put out of action he considered it should be done by fair competition. He regretted that the bill would not be allowed to proceed. Mr M. J. Savage, leader of the Opposition. said that if the railways were to be run on businesslike lines they must be given some measure of freedom in competition. If Mr Veitch's bill was passed, the Railway Board and the Transport Co-ordination Board could not exist side by side. Mr C. H. Clinkard IC., "Rotorua) said freight rates from Auckland to Rotorua were much higher than to Tauranga, which was further away, but which had a harbour. He hoped the Government would do something on the lines suggested in the bill. Mr Clyde Carr 1 Lab.. Timaru) said the differential rates adopted by the Railway Board operated very unfairly against secondary harbours. Dubious methods were adopted to prevent reasonable competition with the railways. Mr W. Nash (Lab., Hutn said that at the request of the chambers of commerce, the Government, he thought, had wrongly put the raihvavs under a separate board, and as soon as the board commenced to operate the chambers of commerce commenced to shout against the policy thev formerly advocated. Now that the railways were being' run competently and efficiently, there was an outcry. The criticism of the board from the commercial community was not justilicd, but the wages paid to railway servants was not creditable to the board or the Government. The wage paid to the most efficient engine-driver in the service was £4 18s a week, or, after deducting superannuation, rent, insurance, and wage tax, £2 17s lid. That was not a fair wage. The Government should immediately consider all forms of transport, rail, road, sea, and air. to reach the cheapest method of shifting goods and passengers from place to place. Mr A. E. Jull. (C„ Waipawa) said there was need of an appeal board lo be set up to decide which was the most, legitimate form of transport. The bill was read a second time, and rukd out of order. The House rose at; 10.30 p.m.