ROAD, RAIL, WATER

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 200, 21 May 1931, Page 11

ROAD, RAIL, WATER

Transport Problems

SOLUTIONS OFFERED

Commissioner’s Review

Two main directions in which the present transport situation in New Zealand might be met were suggested by Mr. J. S. Hunter, Commissioner of Transport, toward lhe end of a paper, entitled “The Solution of New Zealand’s Transport Problem,” delivered before the Technological Section of the Wellington Philosophical Society last evening. The chairman was Dr. E. Eidson, and among those present were prominent officers of the Main Highways Board and the Government Departments of Railways, Public Works, Forestry, and Scientific and Industrial Research.

After an elaborate treatment of railway history, the development of motor transport, and its economic effects, roads and road classification, motor taxation and road maintenance, the problems of road and rail competition, and a comparison of the external economy of road and rail services, Mr. Hunter went on to summarise under seven heads the position in the country to-day. The summary was as follows: —(1) Extensive developments have taken place in the provision of road and rail transport facilities. (2) These developments appear on the whole to have been launched. without the principle of co-ordination having been taken into account. (3) On account of rapid developments in the motor-vehicle, the field of motor transport has been quickly extended. (4) Competition has already seriously affected railway revenue, and indications point to a further drift to the road in the future. (5) There is evidence of uneconomic conditions in the organised motor transport industry, due to internal competition. (6) Statistics show that the share of national production, required to provide transportation facilities has grown fairly rapidly during_ recent years, and suggest that the Dominion is over-supplied with transport facilities. The burden of maintaining these facilities has been rapidly accentuated by the falling level of prices. (7) The deficit on the operations Of the New Zealand Government Railways has been as follows during the last four years (ended in each ease March 31) :—1927, £99,659: 1928. £291.452; 1929. £432,743; 1930. £1,211,269. “There are two main directions,” said Mr. Hunter, “in which action might be taken to meet the situation in New Zealand to-day. These are firstly, co-ordina-tion in construction of road, rail and harbour facilities, and secondly, regulation of the motor transport industry with the object of eliminating uneconomic conditions within the industry, and bringing about co-ordination between motor transport and rail and coastal shipping services.

Co-ordinating Construction. “With regard to'the first, broadly speaking, rail, road and harbour facilities have been developed from the individual rather than the national point of view. The theory of indirect returns has, in the past, been relied upon, and in view of the relatively rapid progress of the Dominion, it has not always been unsuccessful. Experience both here and abroad points, however, to the undesirability and danger of a continuation of the policy of developing or providing either road, rail or sea transport facilities, on an un-coordinated basis. Such a policy can only result in capital being sunk in competing services with economic loss in two directions —firstly, by lowering the earning capacity of the capital in the competing services, and secondly, by causing a misapplication of capital, that is, the capital diverted from a more productive channel.

“Capital supplies in a borrowing country such as New Zealand have very definite limits, and misapplication of capital on a substancial scale will result in retarding production. “The basis of a scheme for co-ordinat-ing the construction of facilities lies in a policy of initiating all developments through a single supreme transport authority," said Mr. Hunter. “This authority should in the first place be in ‘possession of a complete knowledge regarding the capital, required, and the real costs of all forms of transportation. It should also have available to it comprehensive data relating to industry and trade, for the purpose of ascertaining the transport requirements necessary to maintain production at the most efficient level. Developments could then be guided in the direction of securing the best and most efficient means of transport available, all services being considered, at the lowest cost to the ‘ country. “With regard to the second main proposal, the regulation of motor transport, in view of the developments that have already taken place in motor transport, and the absence of any scheme for correlating and co-ordinating the services, it would be too much to expect any scheme "impounded now to correct the errors of the past and prevent their recurrence in the future. The best that can be hoped for is that the situation may gradually be taken in hand, and future developments guided in the right direction.”

System of Licensing. Mr. Hunter quoted at length from the evidence given by Dr. K. G. Fenelon, a prominent English transport economist, before the Royal Commission on Transport in Great Britain. “In view of the conditions in New Zealand,” Mr. Hunter continued, “it would appear that regulation could best be secured through a system of licensing all motor transport services running to timetable on defined routes, the licenses. to be under the control of special licensing authorities set up for the purpose, on the lines of those provided for in the English Road Traffic Act, 1930. “This principle of regulation is not new in connection with transport. It has been in operation in most of the States of the United States of America for some years. It is now in operation in Great Britain, most of the Australian States and many European countries.

Experience indicates that it is the most efficacious method of ensuring that the best use is made of transport facilities. “The licensing authorities would, as in Britain, constitute the chief link in the necessary administrative machinery,” he said. “The following principal factors should be taken into account in connection with each license: —(a) The financial ability of the applicant; (b) the transport requirements of the area; and (c) the existing transport facilities already provided. In addition to these two main steps, Mr. Hunter suggested for the co-ordina-tion of road, rail and shipping facilities the establishment of a supreme transport

authority to keep in touch with developments ami report and make recommendations to Parliament. With regard to the cost of roads, he suggested a national scheme of road classification with the additional requirement that traffic regulations should be strictly enforced. Mr. Hunter’s paper was subjected to an interesting critical discussion by Mr. A. Tyndall, engineer to the Main Highways Board, and to discussion bj* others presen t.