The Press WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1950. Tramway Board Loan Poll

Press, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 26264, 8 November 1950, Page 6

The Press WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1950. Tramway Board Loan Poll

Christchurch ratepayers should have no doubt to-day as to how they should vote on the Tramway Board’s £950,000 loan proposal for the restoration of a transport system that is falling to pieces before their eyes. Nor should they have any doubt about their duty to vote. Unless the poll is carried, the board, or its successor, will be hard pressed to maintain any sort of service at all, and will certainly not be able to do so- without calling on the ratepayers to meet snowballing losses. And, while the system continues to decay, the condition of city streets will almost inevitably go from very bad to worse. The only danger to the success of the poll is not most ratepayers are resigned to the end of public passenger transport in Christchurch. Rather it is that too many who realise the need to replace decrepit trams and tracks by buses and trolleybuses will fail to vote, leaving it to a short-sighted minority to refuse the service a chance of rehabilitation. Two years ago 13,000 of the board’s 37,000. ratepayers voted on a similar proposal and rejected it by a majority of 600. That should not be allowed to happen again. Only by going to the poll and voting for the loan can the people of Christchurch ensure a reasonably efficient and reasonably economical transport system. Most ratepayers benefit directly from public passenger transport, which carries them and their families to work, to school, and to places of recreation and amusement. Their interest in having a modern service is obvious, anji they should readily appreciate that the board's proposal is to their advantage. Other ratepayers derive benefits less Jangible, but probably greater. Public transport brings them their customers and nourishes the growth of their city in a way no privately-owned system could do. All ratepayers should realise that the tramways are at the end of their life, and that patching and makeshifts will be more costly than replacement by rubber-tyred vehicles. All ratepayers, too, should think of the progressive deterioration of the streets used by trams—streets that are already dangerous for motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians; streets that must cost the Tramway Board and other owners a huge annual sum for vehicle maintenance. Considering service, economy, and safety, few ratepayers will deny their duty to vote, and none should permit laziness or prejudice to prevent the fulfilment of that duty. The Tramway Board, ignoring party divisions, is unanimous in supporting the proposal, which does not provide for raising the whole loan at once, but progressively as the money is required for gradual conversion. It should not be overlooked that while this loan is being raised others are being repaid. Disagreement with points of detail in the present board’s proposals, and the unfortunate uncertainty about the board’s caused by the shelving of the amalgamation scheme, should not deter ratepayers from voting for the loan. The authority to be given by the poll is a general one, and each stage of the scheme will be subject to review by the Local Government Loans Board and its expert advisers. If, as seems certain, the City Council takes over municipal transport in Christchurch, it will need the loan authority the boar# is now seeking; and, if the poll is carried, there will be a saving in time, which is now running strongly against the tramways. Self-inter-est, no less than public spirit, should lead ratepayers to vote for the loan.