TRAM FARES.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1159, 21 June 1911, Page 8

TRAM FARES.

PROPOSED CONCESSION DISAPPROVED. SOME COMPARISONS. Tho City Council last evening considered tho following motion, brought down by Councillor Fuller:— "That the present system of concession tickets (other than workers) from tho various termini be reconsidered by the Tramways Committee, , I with a view of issuing in lieu thercoi a card ticket similar to tho oue in use at present, but with a provision for 16 rides for Is., instead of 12. Such card will obviously'be available over all sections." When Councillor Fuller asked leave to proceed with his motion he was ruled out of order by the deputy-Mayor on the ground that the Tramway Committee would be reporting to the council at its next meeting upon the matter dealt with in the motion. Councillors M'Laren, ShirtcMe, and Fletcher contended that this ruling was wrong. Tho deputy-Mayor claimed that he was right. It would be better to await the report of the Tramways Committee. Conlicillor Hindniarsh moved that the ruling of the deputy-Mayor bo disagreed with. Councillor M'Laren seconded, and on a division the ruling of the chair was disagreed with by nine votes to three. Uniformity Wanted. Councillor-Fuller contended that existing concessions in Wellington lacked uni- j formity. If additional concessions were granted on a uniform basis, many'people would ride who now preferred to walk. It had been spread about that adoption of the 16 rides for one shilling system would mean an annual loss of ,£20,000 to . the city. Actually, however, in Dunedin, where the people were more Scotch and canny, and the population was. smaller, the system was in full and successful operation. After some discussion, Councillor Inller was permitted to add to his motion a clause providing that it should be referred to the Tramways Committee. Councillor Cameron said Councillor Fuller's proposal was one of the fairest that ever came before any council. The present concessions benefited only people in the suburb?. It was of very little benefit to those'who lived in the city. If the proposal were adopted the benefit of concessions would be equitably distributed. Views of Councillor Shirtcliffe. Councillor Shirtcliffe remarked that the attempt to compare results achieved in Dunedin with those arrived at in We - lington should not pass unchallenged. Councillor Fuller compared these results with disadvantage to Wellington. lhe figures ■ proved exactly the reverse and very much the reverse. In the first place the Wellington tramways during six years and a half had returned profits totalling .£134,000. Of this amount .£29,000 had been set aside as sinking fund; .£101,548 was accounted for in depreciation fund and unexpended balances of which the f greater part had been reinvested and vnir in its turn profit-earning. Tho council had also established an accident fund, which, at the moment, was in credit ,£3308. These three items made up the .£134,000 of profits earned in 61 years. If Councillor Fuller contended that better results should be attained lie was not considering the welfare' of the public. Tho trams werb earning good profits, and there was a very cheap service. In Wellington the tramways paid .£2198 in rents and rate?. In Dunedin they paid nothing under ■these heads. In Wellington employees were paid rates amounting to ,£1377 per annum in excess of those-paid in Dunedin ; extra time allowance absorbed .£12!)9, and the cxlra cosl. of meal reliefs in this city accounted for an additional sum of .£I3OO. There was an extra working cost per annum in Wellington, as compared with Dunedin, of XBO2B. Although in Dunedin all sums expended in renewals and maintenance were included, in tho allocation for depreciation, Wellington , set aside .£3036 more under this head than the southern city. General charges, working expenses, «nd standing charges wero greater by in Wellington than in Dnnedin. This being added to the declared surplus last year of £5647 made a virtual surplus of -EIS.-IM..as against a. surplus iu Dunsdm of .£9280. Yet Councillor Fuller said the trams were not paying as they ought to pay. Tho average length of a section in Wellington, continued Councillor Shirtcliffe, was 103 chains; In Dunedin the average length was 82 chains, in Chris church 81 chains,.and in Auckland 87 chains. If distance counted for anvth.ing, Wellington had the advantage incontestable. ' The average fare per car mile in Wellington was .79d. In Dune.din.it was Id., or? at the rate of 16 miles for Is.. 03d. Already, however, the Wellington trams were carrying 76 per cent ot the traffic at rates ranging from Jd. per mile. To adopt Councillor Fullers suggestion would be highly dangerous. The engineer (Mr. Richardson) had estimated that the probable- loss on tho concession tickets proposed, would bo -.£21,885 per annum, and that six million additional passengers per annum would have to bo carried to recoup the council for the concession. In the speaker's opinion there was not the remotest chance of getting so large an increase of passengers, for Wellington people already had "the car habit. Even if the passengers were obtained, tho existing rolling stock would not suflice to carry them. Councillor Fuller in Reply. Replying, Councillor Fuller claimed that on tho Wellington tramways a higher prico was naid for management than in any other iar't of Australasia in proportion to' the. "population. Although this was June 20, no tramway balance-sheet was availablo for. the year 1910-11. This placed the speaker at a disadvantage in replying to Councillor Shirtcliffe, who was well grounded with Departmental facts, or fiction ,'or whatever it might be. The sinking fund appropriations in Dunedin had now been raised to one per cent. It was' not truo that tramway' employoes, other than tho salaried officials, were paid more in Wellington than in Dijnedin. Councillor Shirteliffo had the speaker at an disadvantage, because he had Wellington Departmental figures for 1910-11, and had compared them with Dunedin figures for 1909-10. ' Spite of tho "beautiful rosy" figures presented by Councillor Shirtcliffe, a fair comparison with Dunedin would place Wellington tramways in a very bad light. As regarded management, concluded Councillor Fuller, the Wellington tramway system was "dashed bad." Tho motion was rejected by nine votes to 2 Councillors Fuller and Cameron voting with the "ayes."