Education Tours By Midland’s Opposed

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30095, 1 April 1963, Page 12

Education Tours By Midland’s Opposed

Since “far-reaching principles” were involved, the No. 9 Transport Licensing Authority (Mr J. S. Haywood) reserved his decision on an application by Midland Motorways Services, Ltd., for a continuous passenger service licence authorising the carriage of educational tours throughout the South Island from schools and colleges within a 10-mile radius of any of the applicant’s Canterbury depots. Mr W. F. Brown appeared for the applicant. The application was opposed by foe New Zealand Railways Department (Mr F. D. Daly); Days Motors and G. R. Davis (Mr R. A. Young); the Mount Cook and Southern Lakes Tourist Company (Mr M. C. Gresson) and the Christchurch Transport Board (Mr J. G. Hutchison). Mr Young submitted that no case had been made by the Midland company. Evidence for the company had been given at a hearing in December. He said that to grant the application would be “revolutionary and quite contrary to the spirit of the act and the manner in which the act has been interpreted by operators.” "Flagrant Breach”

The applicant’s case, said Mr Young, was nothing more than a subtle endeavour to circumvent the regulations. Since the application was part-heard in December, foe Midland company had advertised in flagrant breach of the regulations by sending material to schools. This had caused, Incalculable harm. It was, he said, underhand and grossly unfair. Mr Gresson said that if the application was successful, it would strike at the root of the entire licensing system and in time render it ineffective. The application was limited to “educational tours” but the term “educational” was in itself quite meaningless and embraced practically everything. Existing operators had to be protected and he urged that no disturbance be made to the present position. The key to the application, he said, was not one of public interest alone, but of interest to the Midland company and its shareholders. Mr Hutchison said that if the application was granted, then so far as trips about Christchurch were concerned, the Midland company would have a great advantage over the Transport Board. If a tours licence was granted, it should be on the condition that the company refrain from operating educational tours substantially in the board’s district. Educational tours were not new business, said Mr Daly. The application by the company was only to do Work that was previously done for many years under automatic contract rights. Should the application be granted, it would then give the company an unfair advantage over all

other companies. The regulations involved had stood the test of time and Mr Daly submitted that the present position should not be upset. Reason for Application Mr Brown said the company was applying for the licence because it did not consider it was possible to do the work under the existing law. Was it to be called revolutionary because it happened to be the first company to make such an application. The paramount consideration must be the public interest, Mr Brown said. If the applicant was to provide greater benefits to teachers and pupils, and to provide more trips, then it should not be stopped from doing so. The application was confined to educational tours—interpreted with common sense. It was a special type of application and there were no hidden desires.

The hearing of further application by the Midland company for an amendment to the continuous passenger services licence to provide a special condition whereby tour trips should have a duration of not less than three days instead of four as at present, and by deleting a condition which restricted the number of vehicles to be operated, was adjourned. Mr Brown said that at pre-' sent the company was restricted to the use of three buses. There should be no such restriction. To do so to a very large reputable transport company when tourism was being actively sought and promoted was unrealistic.