BUS LICENSES

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 64, 9 December 1930, Page 12

BUS LICENSES

Hutt Valley Service CHILDREN’S CONCESSIONS No Return Tickets A number of applications came before the City Council at a special meeting last evening for bus licenses and for authority to make changes in the scales of fares. The council agreed to insert a clause in the Railway Department’s license giving children concession tickets at half rates, but a proposal to confer with the department on the subject of reinstating concession return tickets was defeated. The City Council is the licensing authority under the Motor Omnibus Traffic Act. i 926, and the applications were as follow:—The Railway Department, for approval of increase in bus fares; S. A. Crighton, to establish a service between Wellington and Titahi Bay; J. A. Hunter, to run an additional bus to Titahi Bay ; E. H. and G. E. King, service to Vogeltown; and J. Peach, to establish a service to Plimmerton. . The Railway Department desired to abolish return fares upon the Hutt Valley buses, to place charges upon a mileage basis which would mean an increase beyond Lower Hutt, and to increase the minimum fare from 3d. to 4d., concession tickets to remain at old prices, but not to bo available on Sundays, when no trains are running. This would have entailed an increase to 2/- return on Sundays and bank holidays to Petone and Lower Hutt, and 5/- return to Upper Hutt. The half rate for children would be increased proportionately. Committee’s Recommendations. The Bylaws Committee recommended that the alteration in railway bus fares be approved, the department having agreed to reduce minimum fares from 4d. t° 3d. ... . In regard to the application ot J. A. Hunter, the committee recommended that a license for an additional bus be granted subject to the provisions of the Act and regulations. The committee recommended that all the other applications be not approved.

Railway Bus Charges. A deputation comprising Mr. Walter Nash, M.P. for Hutt, and Mr. F. Campbell, £ member of the Lower Hutt Borough Council, was present, and desired to give evidence respecting the Railway Department’s application. By seven votes to six it was decided to hear the deputation in committee. The council remained in committee for over an hour, after which Councillor Semple-urged that the council should consider very seriously before imposing any additional burdens on the people in the way of increased fares. There were ways and means of cutting down costs which should be explored before increasing fares. Increases in fares would not bring an increase in receipts, as the people would walk. The Railway Commission had reported that the bus service to the Hutt required the services of an experienced manager. Savings could be made in the handling of petrol supplies. It would be a mistake for the council to enable the Government to patch up a service which could be made a profitable service if properly and efficiently handled. He moved that the matter be further considered in six months’ time. Councillor R. McKcen, M.P., seconded the motion, saying he had opposed any increases being granted. He read extracts from the Railway Commission’s report and recommendations, showing how the revenue from the bus service had improved, and pointed out that no increases had been made on the city tramways. Councillor M. F. Luckie. Deputy Mayor, said the Railways Department wanted extra revenue and was justified in asking for a reasonable increase. The council would probably be faced with the necessity of either shortening the tram sections or increasing the fares, and how could it do so if this application was refused

Losses Greatly Reduced, Councillor Chapman said revenue from the trams had fallen off because people were too poor and they could not afford to pay increased fares. The suggestion was a 20 per cent, increase, and he did not think the council should agree. The loss on the buses had been reduced from £7OOO to £B5O, so that the tendency was favourable and did not warrant higher fares. Councillor G. Mitchell said the increased fares would be a charge on the wages of the workers, who were the greater number of those using the buses. The services were paying when the Railways Department took them over; running expenses had not increased, and they had better roads to run on. It would be a wrong policy to cut out the return fare. People had gone out to the Hutt Valley to reduce their rent charges. Councillor W. T. Hildreth was about to speak when Councillor T. Forsyth moved that the motion “be now put.” Councillor Ilislop seconded, and the motion was carried on a division by seven votes to six. Councillor Hildreth said he desired to explain his previous attitude, which would have been different had he been aware of the statement in the commis sion’s report that the losses had been reduced to £B5O. that £3300 had been paid off the goodwill, and that a profit was anticipated in the next year. The amendment to defer consideration for six mouths was defeated. Councillor Hildreth moved that the matter he referred back to the committee for further consideration in view of the alterations the manager of the railways had agreed to. Children’s Concessions Given. Councillor Mitchell said he would be prepared to move the adoption of the report if there, was a clause giving children the advantage of the concession ticket at half-price, and the return fare was reinstated. Councillor Luckie said before imposing that on the Railway Department it should be given an opportunity of saying how it would affect its position. Councillor Mitchell asked if the council proposed in the meantime to ask the department to reinstate the return fare. Councillor Luckie replied that to do so would seriously affect the whole of its revenue, as it looked for the increased revenue from that alteration. After some further discussion it was agreed to add a clause to the report giving concession tickets to children at halfprice. Councillor Mitchell moved a further amendment that a committee of Councillors Luckie, Hislop, and himself interview the general manager of railways with a view to endeavouring to get his agreement to the reinstatement of the concession return fare and report to the council on Thursday. This was defeated

The amendment to refer the matter back to the committee was defeated, and the report as amended by the clause relating to children’s concession tickets at half-price was carried by seven votes to six. Vogeltown’s Needs. The council then dealt with the remaining recommendations of the committee. Councillor Wright, referring to the proposed Vogeltown service, asked if it were not possible to allow a private firm to run the service if it would guarantee not to run alongside the tramlines, but would come from Vogeltown down Tasman and Taranaki Streets. In that way the buses could hardly come into serious competition with the trains. It seemed unfair that the people who had been denied a service by the City Council should be denied the transport offered by private enterprise. Councillor Luckie said the proposal had been carefully considered by the committee, which had every sympathy with the Vogeltown people, but it would compete with the tramway system. They had offered them the right to make it a feeder service, but that had been declined. The committee was recommending the tramways department to reconsider the matter and see if something could not be done to meet the wishes of .Vogeltown.