ROAD v. RAIL

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 24, 23 October 1936, Page 11

ROAD v. RAIL

Licensing of Goods

Services

NEW REGULATIONS Restricting Competition In a statement yesterday the Minister o" Transport, Hon. R. Semple, announced that the regulations dealing with detailed procedure for licensing of goods services would be gazetted shortly. “These regulations,” said Mr. Semple, “have been circulated in draft form to all interested parties and all suggestions and recommendations have been carefully considered. “In addition to the general administrative provisions,” said the Minister, “there are several important conditions to which I wish to make special reference. In the first place the regulations provide that goods operators must accept for transport any goods offering, and, as a matter of policy, it Is proposed to grant much wider areas to the licensees. This will mean that the road services will be less restricted and have more flexibility. In order, however, that uneconomic and undesirable competition may not develop between road and rail services, it is provided, in all area licences that where there is an available route for the carriage of goods which includes at least thirty miles of railway, then the goods must be carried by rail. This condition will not apply to certain perishable goods or to route licences. “The hours of work and rates of pay for all drivers of goods-service vehicles are also covered by the regulations, as the Government considers that labour conditions in the transport industry are at present most unsatisfactory and must be improved. “In addition, the regulations provide for the inspection of all goods-service vehicles once every six months. I regard this as another step along the road to safer highways and feel sure that it will be generally accepted as a reasonable provision.” Mr. Semple stated that the question of those goods services licensed to operate for long distances over routes parallel to the railways was of considerable importance. These services were not covered by the “thirty-mile restriction,” and each case would lie considered by the licensing authority on its merits. If, however, the authority; after hearing the evidence, came to the conclusion that, having regard to the services provided by railway for the carriage of goods, the road service was unnecessary or undesirable in the public interest, the licensing authority would give its opinion accordingly. Buying Off Competitors. “However.” continued Mr. Semple, “both the Prime Minister and myself have stated time and time again that tlie Government would not deal harshly or ruthlessly with any licensed road operator. In order, therefore, that no undue hardship should, be caused, arrangements will be made io enable the service to be continued for a term so that the operator may negotiate with the Railway Department for the disposal of his plant and equipment.”

The Minister indicated that the purchase price to be paid by the railways for any service acquired would be on similar lines to those on which the department has already purchased a number of road services. No allowance would be made for goodwill and the price of the vehicles and other property would be assessed on tlie basis of there being an available market and a willing purchaser. If it is not possible for tlie operator to agree with the Railway Department as to price, the matter will be referred to the Licensing Authority for decision. The Minister stated further that, with respect to employees in these road services the Government had taken steps which, he hoped, would enable regular employees in road services that are refused renewals in the circumstances already outlined to be placed in other employment, and that should it become necessary for any of these men to move to another locality for the purpose of taking up new employment, the Railway Department would arrange to provide the necessary railway facilities.

“I think everyone will admit,” concluded Mr. Semple, “that tlie policy outlined will materially help in the co-ordination of land transport without inflicting any undue hardship on any section of the community.”