Transport Ministry For N.Z. Suggested

Press, Volume XCIX, Issue 29222, 4 June 1960, Page 15

Transport Ministry For N.Z. Suggested

A Ministry of Transport to advise the Cabinet on policy, and public investment and controlled expenditure of public money on transport assets •to avoid uneconomic duplication of facilities are two suggestions contained in a background paper , presented to the 1960 Industrial Development Conference. The suggestions are made by Mr R. J- Polaschek, administration officer of the Transport Department. They are made, with others, with the object of reducing transport costs “to the minimum level consistent with the maintenance of the range of services that we need.” Other future action deemed necessary by Mr Polaschek on this basis is the relation of transport charges to economic costs “and where lower rates are charged for special reasons, meet the deficit by direct subsidy.” Cost-saving Devices

Mr Polaschek also proposes the removal of arbitrary restrictions on competition between the different kinds of transport and the adoption, to a greater extent than at present, of cost-saving devices such as pallets, trailers, and mechanical loading aids. Transport management training should also be fostered, in his opinion. “If these actions are not taken, costs will be higher than they need be. and we will be obliged to rely on ‘rule of thumb’ methods of co-ordinating transport with incalculable economic consequences,” he says in his paper. Geography. population, seasonal production and one-way traffic are aspects of the economy referred to by Mr Polaschek in his paper. He says that in 1958 an estimated £272 million was spent on internal transport—2l per cent, of the gross national product. He refers to economic difficulties of one-way rail traffic and

gives one example that “the railproduces approximately eight times as many gross tonmiles per route mile from Otira to Arthurs Pass as it does in the reverse direction.”

He also says that the average load factor of public carriers is approximately 42 per cent, of capacity. "This is due to the fact that the bulk of their work involves one-way load,” he commfents.

Mr Polaschek says that from a national point of view privatelyowned transport is a costly investment, and adds that its development is not only rapid but uneconomic. It is also, he suggests. “a reflection of the users’ discontent with the high cost and the standard of service offered by our public transportation agencies”, but adds:

“In part, this reaction is based on a misinterpretation of costs. In many cases it would pay a producer to employ the railways or a carrier rather than to run his own truck. He does not always realise the total cost of using his own vehicle.

“If public road and rail transport is to regain a large part of the work it must improve its public relations, and sell its service on the basis of cost and convenience,” Mr Polaschek says.

“It is not merely enough to rely on the protection, or possible extensions in the protection, it obtains from the Transport Act. Unless they take positive action, public transport services could well be reduced to a comparatively minor role,” he says.