MOTOR TRANSPORT

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 34, 9 February 1926, Page 8

MOTOR TRANSPORT

THE BUS PROBLEM

REGULATIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION

CONFERENCE OPENED.

The conference called by the Prime Minister of representatives of local bodies, motor interests, and others concerned, for the purpose of discussing the motor omnibus regulations commenced at the Parliamentary Building* this morning. Fifty or sixty delegates from all parts of the Dominion are in attendance.

The Prime Minister (the Eight Hon. J.. G. Coates) presided at the, outset, the Minister of Internal Affairs (tlio Hon. R. F. Bollard) also being present. Beveral officers of the Public Works Department watched the proceedings on behalf of the Government.

In opening the proceedings,/ t lie Prime Minister suggested that after his address a motion should be introduced to ascertain whether regulation or no"' regulation was wanted. The various proposals in the draft regulations could then be taken seriatim, and those upon which there was a conflict of opinion could be referred to committees for recommendation and further consideration in open conference. NEED FOE REGULATIONS. Mr. Coates said that the Government had for some considerable time realised that regulation of public transportation must be undertaken. In the past, transportation had been mainly by ship, train, electric tramway, and horse vehicle. The first three had been under close supervision by the Government to ensure'that'public interest was adequately safeguarded, and particularly that the lives of passengers were not jeopardised.' In connection with the horse vehicles, these being slower moving, were naturally not proritf-to create accidents to the same degree, and were not the subject of detailed regulation. The advent of the self-propelled vehicle, however, altered conditions, and within the last few years the balance, particularly what might be called retail transportation, had shifted very greatly towards what has been commonly known as the motor-vehicle. So far, there has been little or no regulation of this business, while the electric tram, against which, the motor-bus particularly competed, was regulated with respect to its safety appliances, fares, tune-tables, routes, conditions of employment for its staff, etc., and was required to maintain a substantial proportion of the width of the roadway (amounting in many eases to more than half), which it traversed. The motorbns, its special competitor, ran with practically no restrictions, and without Government supervision and regulation. In the event of an accident by ship, rail, or tramway, the dependants of anyone injured or killed could obtain compensation from the proprietors of the undertaking, which was generally the Government, a municipality, or a strong public company. In the case of motor-buses, however, these had frequently been operated by people without capital, who paid merely a nominal sum to a seller of motorvehicles, and in the event of an accident to such a vehicle, there would be no chance of an injured person or his relatives being .adequately compensated. Furthermore, the institutions like the railways, tramways, and steamers were strictly regulated by the Government as regards the conditions of employment and wages of their employees, fares, etc., while a motor-bus 1 might be operated by a man who had very little interest in it, and who in his endeavours to pay off time-pay-ments was prepared to work any hours and under any conditions, thereby unfairly competing with .bodies who required to comply with awards, and furthermore, the upkeep of the vehicles so operated would almost invariably be of a lower seal than that of a properly organised large business, with resultant risk to those using such a vehicle. HOW TRAMWAYS ABB AFFECTED. , "All these points," said Mr. Coates, "show that regulation of motor vehicle (simply as such) is necessary, but last year a further aspect of the problem was pointedly brought before the Government by the representatives of municipal tramways, who gointed out that their ratepayers had very large sums, amounting in the aggregate to some six millions, invested in tramway undertakings, and that the financial stability of these was being greatly jeopardised, if not entirely undermined, by the unregulated opposition of motorbuses, which while not setting out to , eater for the public at all times and under all conditions, proceeded to, as I might say, 'skim the cream' off the traffic during the.rush hours, leaving the tramways to carry on during the intermediate periods during which they had never been able to obtain payable loads, in fact, it may be taken as axiomatic that it is only the heavy traffic during the three 'rush' periods of the day that enables any tramway organisation to carry on. The tramways pointed out that if at this 'rush' period they were to lose a substantial part of their traffic, there was no possibility of their picking that 'Tip at any other time. . The chief concern of the Government is the daily life of the people, and to secure the most reliable and cheapest form of transport.,

"While the Government's chief function is the protection of, the life and liberty of its citizens," lie continued, "it nevertheless has a duty which required it to protect any large body of its citizens against financial loss, if such can be done without undue interference. As I have said before, the money invested in tramways in New Zealand is approximately £6,000,000, and of this the greater part is municipal indebtedness, for which approximately 600,000 people (half the population of New .Zealand) are responsible. It behoves the Government to assist these thousands of people to preserve an asset which has cost them so much, and wjjjch, irrespective of motor transport, is really necessary to the transportation system of the country. EQUALITY FOE ALL. "Investigations in other, countries Where similar problems have arisen have led to the conclusion that tramways are an essential part of the life of the modern city, and the sugegstion to scrap tramways entirely and turn to buses altogether for public transportation is impracticable' At the same time, it is recognised by everyone that motor transport is an essential part of our life at the present time, and also cannot be done without. In many cases motor transport is superior to any other form of transport, and consequently must be supported and encouraged. At the same time, in addition to so regulating it that it does not ■unfairly compete with other methods of transport, there is also the necessity of obviating "cut-throat-competition between 'different units or coinpapies of • motor-buses, whereby the State as a whole becomes impoverished.

"Though the community may apparently obtain better services for a time while the intense competition exists," ho «aid, "the inevitable result eventually is bad, and will probably finally result in an increase in the cost of transportation, rather than in a decrease to which on a short view it appears to lead. The motor vehicle today plays a very important fart' in

our transport system. It has definite uses an 4 there is a large field for development. Large and growing suburbs to-day rely solely upon their daily transport by motor vehicle. It is hoped, therefore, that with all interests represented here to-day, we may be able to evolve something which will be to the good of transportation throughout the country, and while assisting the carrying of the people, will not result in undue hardship to any individuals. "-

In conclusion, he thanked, those concerned, including the Press, for the discussions that already had taken place upon the regulations, and invited furI ther frank consideration of the propo- ! sals so that the best conditions for the benefit of all might be evolved. TRANSPORT CONTROL BOARD. In order to provide a basis of discussion, the Hon. J. Barr, M.L.C., moved that in the interests of the general public regulations for the control of motor buses are necessary. This was seconded by Mr. B. L. Hammond, who represented the motor bus proprietors and allied trades, and carried unanimously. Eaising a point in regard to interpretation of the regulations, Mr. Hammond said the bus proprietors proposed that the Transport Appeal Board should consist of three members—a Stipendiary Magistrate representing the Government, a representative of the local bodies in the district affected, and a representative of the omnibus proprietors. He further intimated that the allied motor trades had prepared counter-regulations. These were circulated for perusal and considera-' tion.

Mr. F. J. Nathan, Mayor of Palmerston North, objected to the definition of "motor-bus" as "intended to carry passengers for hire at separate fares of not more than 25." He appealed for regulations which would control all traffic, no matter what the charge. They wanted regulations which would be fair and reasonable, and which wonld not bring hardship to bear upon any section of the people.

This was supported by Canterbury delegates. •

Replying to Mr. Hammond, Mr. Coates said that the decisions of the conference would not be binding, but would be weighed by the Government in the public interests. What he wanted was the expressed opinion "of all the interests, but it was not necessarily proposed to give effect to the opinions voiced. He realised that if decisions of the conference were regarded one section of those concerned would be liable to be outvoted by another section. CONSTITtrriON OF BOARD. Consideration was then given to an amendment prepared by the allied motor trades for a control board of three persons. Mr. Barr, speaking on behalf of the tramway undertakings, said they realised that bus transport had come to stay, and they considered that a board consisting of only three represented interests would not be fair to aIL They wanted a square deal for all, including the tramway undertakings and perhaps even the police. All affected interests should have representation.

The Dunedin viewpoint, as expressed by the Mayor, Mr. Tapley, was' that there were too many boards at present, and the fewer the better. He agreed with Mr. Barr that Mr. Hammond's proposal would usher in dual control and unnecessary expense. Mr. Potter (Auckland) agreed with the principal of a control board, and pointed out that unless all interests were represented some districts and some of the larger centres would be affected detrimentally, such as Auckland, where the population of the suburban areas exceeded that of the city itself.

Mr. Hammond said the allied trades were absolutely opposed to the local bodies being the sole determining factor in matters in which they also were vitally interested. After further discussion the principle of a board of control was approved, the constitution being deferred for subsequent determination, Mr. Coates remarking that he took it that the feeling of the conference was in the main in favour of the Government's proposal for wide representation. URBAN AND INTER-URBAN VEHICLES. Mr. C. B. Agar (Christchurch) moved that the 2s qualification in the definition of "motor omnibus" should be deleted, and this was seconded by a Dunedin delegate. Mr. F. W.\Furkert, Chief Engineer of the Public Works Department, said the idea of the proposal was merely to keep the thing within reasonable bounds. It was not intended that it should apply to cars plying, say, between Wellington and Wanganui, but only to the city. He pointed out that inter-urban transport was treated reparately in the United States. In view of this explanation, Mr. Tapley withdrew tlje seconding of the motion on behalf of Dunedin, remarking that sufficient protection could be given in another, way from inter-urban services. , / The motion was seconded' by Mr. Nicholson (Canterbury). The motion was then withdrawn, the mover expressinj himself as satisfied with the explanation that local bodies would retain whatever powers they already possessed over inter-urban transport in their own boundaries. LOCAL BODIES VEESUS PRIVATE ENTERPRISE. Objection was raised by Mr. Hammond on behalf of the bus proprietors to the licensing authority having the i'ght to determine the routn to be followed by applicants 'or licenses. It was not proper for any licensing authority to be able to say that the omnibus proprietor should not ply on a particular road. "We stand for equal open competition for all," he said. "This clause is designed presumably with the sole object of giving local authorities which are in control of publicly-owned services an absolute monopoly of the public transport. . . . '.. his will have the effect of closing down private enterprise as soon as these regulations come into operation. . . .We agree to the local bodies fixing routes solely on grounds of public safety." It was not right, either, that they should control the fixation of minimum or maximum fares. He objected to a clause which, in effect, rang the death knell of private enterprise. ... Voices: "Nonsense!" Mr. H. D. Bennett, representing the Wellinggton City Council, said that public interests must be protected against national interests. Public funds had been spent upon roads and upon arranging transport to the various suburbs, and he submitted they were entitled from protection from people who contributed nothing towards the costs of roads laid down for the purposes of that transport.

Motor-bus proprietors: "We do." The speaker said they were there for the protection of the tramways and the people, and they appealed for a "fair" go for all. Mr. Jones (Mayor of Eastbourne) referred to the competition of motor-buses with the harbour ferry service. During twelve days of the recent Christmas and New Year holidays, the ferry company's revenue was £1185, as against £1761 for the corresponding period ia the previous year. That l«ss ! was not because the ferry fares were j too high, or that an efficient ferry service was not being provided, but that there was not enfficient control of motor-bos traffic, wMch did not ran £o

a definite time-table. Moreover, the buses were filled right up, exceeding capacity.

Mr. Hammond: "Put on yonr own buses and do the same. Scrap your boats."

Mr. Gardner, Mayor of Grey Lynn, regarded the clause as an attempt to kill the motor-buses, and he instanced certain private enterprises had been put out of business. He submitted that if protection was given to tramways it should also be given to ferry services, and if Eastbourne was to be protected, what about other private concerns t Was not the cry for protection of ferry companies an attempt to protect bad management or obsolete boat services? Mr. Coates: "Assuming that a service is reasonably adequate, would you advocate that it should be changed?" The Speaker: "If a better form of transport comes along, certainly." (Hear, hear! from the bus proprietors.) Mr. Tapley, Mayor of Dunedin, said they did not wish to stultify private enterprise, but it must run on fair lines. The development of the ciites would never have been adequate if it had depended upon private enterprise. Established transport systems were being threatened, and if the private companies were to come in they must be prepared to run to regular time-tables, and not feed on the cream of the traffic at rush hours only, which amounted . to piracy. There should be control over the routes, time-tables, type of buses, and number of vehicles plying, in the interests of the people and public safety.

At this stage the conference adjourned until 2.30 p.m.