RAILWAYS AND MOTOR TRANSPORT

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22271, 9 December 1937, Page 7

RAILWAYS AND MOTOR TRANSPORT

TO THE EDITOR OP THE PRESS. Sir,—As the letter of “Looker On” dated November 9 (which appeared in “The Press” of November 26, together with another letter by the same writer, dated November 10) was not submitted to me before publication, my comments, which you published m the same issue, referred only to his letters of November 2 and November 10. Had “Looker On’s” letter of Novemer 9 been before me at the time my comments were made, the further matters he touches on there would have been replied to, and I would, of course, have made no reference to his omitting to deal further with the Lewis Pass road fare question, as in his letter of November 9 he returns to that subject. “Looker On” states that the licensing authority receives the suggestions of the railways or other operator as to fares and approves of them or amends them. The clause of the act bearing on this point is as follows: “Licensing authority to fix routes, fares, time-tables, etc. In granting any passenger service licence the licensing authority shall prescribe the fares to be charged for the carriage of passengers. . . In view of this, it is idle to suggest, as “Looker On does, that the fares are decided by anyone but the licensing authority. In his letter of November 2 Lookci On” wrote: “My point is to show the public that progress and enterprise cannot be expected from the railways under its present management. My reply, which appeared in “The Press of November 8, was to the point advanced by “Looker On” in regal'd to “the railways under its present management”; and I showed clearly that there has never been greater progress and enterprise in the control of the railways than at present. “Looker On” now quotes the “Charles Motors, Hororata,” and the “Kowai Bush-Springfleld” services as having been taken over and dropped by the department. May I point out to “Looker On” that this quite minor venture (a matter of three buses and a truck run by the railways from 1928 to 1931) was taken up and dropped long before the advent of those responsible for the present control and management of the railways. It is quite evident, since he requires to go back so far. that “Looker On” now realises how difficult it is for him to •make his point. . „ . , Regarding the Lewis Pass lares, i may say that the comparisons I made were reasonable comparisons, taking into account the seasonal nature of much of the traffic, its density, andso on—considerations, doubtless, which would weigh with the licensing authority when the fares were decided upon- “Looker On,” ignoring all such considerations, quotes certain lower fares which are for routes not m any way comparable with that of the Lewis Pass. There was no desire on my part to pick out fares that would favour the department’s case. This is quite unnecessary, as the facts speak for themselves. All the fares quoted by me as at higher rates than those for Lewis Pass were fpr services run by private operators. (Here, again, “Looker On” was wrong in thinking some of them were for services operated by the railways.) I may say that the Railway Department’s fares in the Wellington-Hutt area and between Napier and Hastings are as low a mile as any quoted by “Looker On”; but, as already pointed out, and as “Looker On” must be well aware, the only reasonable comparison is for routes to which approximately the same conditions apply. As indicated by me in your issue of November 26,1 have no wish to extend further a correspondence with “Looker On” whose letter of November 9 again gives evidence that he does not desire to be fair either to the department or the management of the railways, and who, after stating the point he wishes to make, shifts completely away from it when his contention is disproved instead of admitting, as any genuine seeker after information would, that he had based his con ten-