Bus services

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32587, 22 April 1971, Page 12

Bus services

Sir, —The Christchurch Transport Board provides an essential service to the public of Christchurch. Its main users are senior citizens, housewives, and children, and although I rarely travel on a bus I am glad the service is there when required. I was therefore disappointed to read that the City Council refused any of the petrol tax revenue to help the Transport Board balance its books. The basic concept of the Carte: Report is that the petrol tax should cover public transport losses. These losses are caused mainly by lack of passengers and congested roads, meaning a slow, inefficient service. The additional tax, it is hoped, will discourage some workers from taking their cars into the city, increase the number of bus passengers. and help produce a fast, efficient service. If we have to be burdened by the petrol tax, at least it should provide some of the revenue to the organisation it was originally designed to help. It is essential that we keep a good, efficient bus service.—Yours, etc., R. J. PRESCOTT. April 20, 1971.

Sir, —It now appears that as the result of last night’s decision by the City Council the bus users will again be penalised by a rise in fares. Why is it always the users who suffer through no fault of their own? It would be better to increase' the rate, which over the whole area would not amount to much to each ratepayer and so be borne by all? If the fares are increased it will mean more traffic congestion in the city, as many present bus users will use their cars and those close to the city will walk.—Yours, etc., SHANKS’S PONY. April 20, 1971.

Sir,—When the petrol tax was first mooted 90 per cent of citizens assumed it was to be used to assist municipal bus corporations throughout New Zealand. The tax should be paid into a board of prudent men, one board in the South Island and one in the North Island. Allow the money to accumulate; then, at a given date, pay out to the municipal bus bodies throughout New Zealand according to their requirements, the balance of the money to be used for roads if necessary or any charitable or worthy cause. To throw money out to Squealing boroughs and councils is only

causing extravagance. Perhaps they could get a handout if they showed good cause.—Yours, etc., CITIZEN. April 21, 1971.

Sir, —At last we are beginning to see the “benefits” of the petrol tax. So much for the much-vaunted points proposed as its advantages—readily available funds for local bodies (hence less demand on ratepayers); discourage motorists from using their cars for daily commuting; and more efficient use of public transport. However, what happens in reality is totally different. As the Transport Board is not to receive any of this tax, it will have to raise its fares and also its share of the rate demand. So the poor motorist and ratepayer gets it three ways—higher rates, higher bus fares, and costlier petrol. Incidentally, what is the tax to be used for since seemingly the original aims for it are to be abandoned? Financially, the ratepayers were better off in every way concerning rates and bus fares under the old “unimproved” system.— Yours, etc., HAD AGAIN. April 21, 1971.