TRAMWAY BOARD DEFICIT

Press, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 26025, 31 January 1950, Page 4

TRAMWAY BOARD DEFICIT

£71,345 FOR NINE MONTHS

LABOUR MEMBERS REPLY TO CRITICISMS

The Christchurch Tramway Board debated its increasing deficit on party lines at its meeting yesterday. Mr C. C. Holland opened the discussion by drawing attention to revenue and expenses figures. He said the deficiency for the first nine months of the financial year was £71,345, an increase of £5367 on the deficiency at the same date last year. A committee report reviewed results for a four-weekly period, the following figures being given:—

In the last two years each of the other main centres had applied for, and been granted, a substantial increase in fares continued Mr Holland. This board was not prepared to do the same. Costs were bound to remain in excess of income while the present policy was pursued. He believed that those who used the public transport system should pay for it. The recent increases in Sunday tickets and race tickets were just playing with the problem.

Steps Taken by Board It was not fair to charge the Labour members of the board with failing to appreciate the seriousness of the position, said Mr G. Manning. For the last eight meetings or so he had brought to the notice of the board the, increased deficiency. The board had increased the fares on certain trips and had reduced the number of trips. Special services would increase the revenue. Most of the members of the board would disagree with Mr Holland’s contention that the whole of the cost of the service should be borne by the passengers. “We have done what we could do; we have adjusted the fares we thought could be adjusted,” said Mr Manning. “We deplore the fact that the equipment is deteriorating, but a large part of that is because we are in a transition stage. We may or may not be taken over by the council. I feel the t City Council will be asked to take over on April 1 this year, and consequently we canpot take a long-term view.”

Labour’s Policy While admitting that the board was labouring under great difficulties at present, he considered that the Labour members were elected on the dishonest platform of reduced fares, said Mr H. A. C. North. There was possibly some justification for a substantial rate if the board felt that the present high costs were temporary, but everything pointed to the maintenance of presentday costs. The old board had realised there would b’e a substantial rate to pay for its proposed loan, but the loan would have given an up-to-date service at reasonable cost. Propertyowners should subsidise the users of trams to the extent that the service brought benefits to the city as a whole. “We know that the majority of the members on the Labour side of the table were prepared to put up fares more than they did, but they answered the call elsewhere and the result was a very inadequate increase,” said Mr North. “When the City Council takes over it will find we have virtually reached the end of our assets.” Labour members of the board evidently had thought that the number of passengers would increase if fares were not increased, but they had now found that that was not so, said Mr North. It was a curious fact- that the drop in the number of passengers carried was in those who bought. trip cards, 20-ride cards, and school and apprentice concession .^ga^ds,.. CaSh fares, which had been increasda by' the old board, w r ere the billy class of ticket which had increased in sales last year.

Adjustments Suggested “I would take away all these concessions, adjust all the other fares, and possibly increase the cash fares,” said Mr North. Mr N. R. Forbes said Citizens’ Association members did not mention that increases in the power charges amounted to £2500 or £3OOO a year. The board also had to meet an increase of about £25,000 in 'wages,' making a total of about £28,000. If it had not been for those items, Labour’s promises might have been carried out. When Labour gained a majority on the board it tried to institute rating on the unimproved value, which would have meant a reduction in rates for 87J per cent, of the ratepayers, Mr Forbes Said. Mr Holland had said that the user of the service should pay, but if he was selling property on a tramline he would not hesitate to put “very handy to tram” in his advertisement to boost the value of the proP< Mr North had said that if the fares were increased the number oi passengers would not decrease, but if he looked at the monthly returns he would see that nearly every month they showed a decrease. Recently the conditions of the family ticket were altered, and a big drop in the sales of these tickets was noticed. Mr Forbes said that if some of the members on the other side had cooperated something worth while would have been done.

If the price of the 20-trip cards was increased there would be a further drop in the revenue from them, said the chairman (Mr J. E. Jones).

“I cannot see how we are going to increase our revenue,” Mr Jones continued. “When we see that the existing cheap service is not being used, the answer is that it is impossible to increase fares at the present time.”

Increase . or Dec. Dec. Decrease 1948. 1949. £ £ £ Revenue . 31,419 31,835 +415 Operating Expenses . 30,948 32,110 + 1182 Net revenue 471 *275 Mileage . 320,955 319,024 *Net loss.