ROAD V. RAIL

Evening Post, Volume CXIII, Issue 125, 31 May 1927, Page 12

ROAD V. RAIL

WASTEFUL COMPETITION

EAILWAYS ALREADY SHORT OF

WORK

A strong ease for eliminating parallel transport competition with the rail-

ways by. means of motor services is put up editorially by the "New Zealand Bailways Magazine," which points

out that the provision of motor ser-

vices in' excess of , thti Dominion re-

quirements is an. economic waste bound to result in losses, and, in a country where the - railways are State owned, must end in increased taxa-

"The question whether transport should be controlled in order that _a

country's resources may be economically developed is one •to which all thoughtful minds must turn with increasing frequency, as the complexity of the problems of transportation and 1 its rapidly developing • demands become more pressing" (says the cdi-

torial). "With the passing of the Railways Amendment Act of 1925, the New Zea-

land Railways gained authority to undertake road transport. This was a necessary extension of carrying authority if the railways weTe to function in the most economical manner. Wasteful competition was prevented, in another sphere, by the Motor Onmibus Traffic Act of last session, designed to" afford protection to the various

municipal tramways. ♦ Tar greater than the menace to the trams, however, is the menace to the railways which motor competition has produced, and the position cannot be considered as adequately met merely by permitting the railways to sun their own. motors! There is, definitely, one way •which is best suited to supply the requirements of each locality and route. Tp test out the relative meritß of railway and -motor by close investigation of all the factors that go to the making of transport conditions is a matter deserving of close attention and impartial,, scientific inquiry. ♦'Even where railways are privately owned, State intervention to regulate the disposal of traffic by the most economic means could be justified in the interest of national well-being. But al-. though many attempts have been made, co country has yet grappled with the problem effectively. . "Of conditions in the United States, the 'Bailway Age' remarks: 'No railway would now be allowed to build a new line directly paralleling and com-; petitive with a line of another railway but the favourite routes for the construction of main trunk highways all over the country have been directly parallel with the railways. Once they have.been built active competition of trucks and buses with the railways usually begins at oneo, and in many cases without any consideration on the part of public or public authorities of whether traffic was being diverted from the railways in circumstances that would inevitably increase the total cost of ■ transportation .to the public, without- any corresponding increase or improvement ia th^r service rendered. "If the course pursued in the United States—where all the railways are privately owned—is recognised, to, be uneconomic, how much more bo is the position that has arisen in New Zealand? For here, not only does the withdrawal of traffic from the railways-to

the roads -necessitate higher rates on the traffic left for the railways to con.'veyybut the State's revenue fronv the railways is reduced —a condition which reacts unfavourably on the general taxpayer, who may be untouched in other respects by wasteful competition. "There would be justification for duplicating railway services by road ones if the growth of business rendered the railways inadequate to cope with the requirements-of modern transport. But it is .well,known that our railways are fcot working at a capacity anywhere nearly approaching their maximum, that they could handle traffic more economically if they had more of it, and that considerable expense has been entailed in seeking and holding traffic which, but for .competition, would have come to, and remained with,, the rail — unasked. "The protection afforded the trams has already proved beneficial. The effeot of competition against them was, however, easily discernible, and its effect on taxation (in the form of city ■and borough rates) was closely, brought .home to tie taxpayers concerned. The loss occasioned through competition with railways is no less real and, at the same time, very much greater; lint, as it has only a general application .through the operation of indirect tax- , ation, the effect of it is not so eatiily traced nor so readjly acknowledged. "The mos'c vital point of all remains : to be. made. During the last financial year, a year in which there was. certainly no marked expansion in the, ;i gross amount of traffic to be handled in •:•■■ the Dominion, there was an increase of 30 per cent, in the number of motor- - trucks, etc., registered. The facilities •,! for transport in the previous year wore ': more than adequate for the country's needs. It is therefore self-evident tliat ,':■■ this heavy increase in transport capacity was not only without warrant, but, by diverting the flow of men and money 1 from, its natural direction —that of pr* mary production—into superfluous au:ti liary "transportation, has actually beei a heavy drag on' the country's eeono mic recovery. '{Not all things are amenable to con : trolj; but among great public utilitiei without our own Dominion none ii more easily dealt with—once the eeono mic facts are known—and none is mo* deserving of protective action thai ';■ transport.'' ■