TRANSPORT BILL

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 148, 19 December 1929, Page 10

TRANSPORT BILL

WHY WAS IT KILLED ?

"A PARTY MOVE"

Statements of great interest to motoring associations and those engaged in commercial transport wore made by the Hon. W. A. Veitch (Minister of Transport) in an interview, when he took the opportunity of replying to criticisms by Mr. A. E. Ansell, M.P.^ president of the South Island Motor Union.

"I was very interested to note," said Mr. Veitch, "that Mr. Ansell had at last ventured to express his objections to the Transport Law Amendment Bill introduced by me last session, and also to learn that 'his own criticism of the Bill was that there was no serious attempt in it to co-ordinate those two systems (road and rail) of transport.' I was not surprised, however, from the published report of Mr. Ansell's remarks to gather that he had not given this very important problem serious consideration in the past; indeed, it is obvious that had Mr. Ansell really understood the problem and the provisions of the Bill, he would not have been justified in making the assertion to which I have referred.

"Had Mr. Ansell and other critics been even remotely conversant with the trend of transport events in other countries they would have appreciated that the Government's measure was based 0^ a very close study of the experience and proposals of other countries with the essential adaptations for conditions peculiar to New Zealand.

"The machinery provided in Part 111. of the Bill for the regulation of commercial transport was practically identical with that since recommended by the British- Eoyal Commission on Transport after probably the most 'exhaustive investigation into the question that has ever been carried out, the order of reference being: 'To take into consideration the problems arising out of the growth of road traffic, and with a view to securing the employment of the available means of transport in Great Britain (including transport by sea coastwise and by ferries) to the greatest public advantage, to consider and report what measures, if any, should be adopted for their regulation and control, and so far as is desirable in the public interest to promote their co-ordinated working and development.'

"I have before me tho second report dealing with the co-ordination of passenger transport, and, as is well known, cabled advice has been received that the recommendations of the Commission have been incorporated in a Bill introduced recently in the British House of Commons by Mr. Herbert Morrison, Minister of Transport. ABREAST OF THE TIMES. "Par from supporting the view expressed by Mr. Ansell, that no tears should be shed for the shelving of the Bill, I feel sure that !he public of New Zealand will appreciate the fact that those responsible for the formulation of the Government's proposal were abreast of the times, and that the killing of the Bill was distinctly a party move that will result in a very material waste of public money, and an unnecessary continuation of tho present chaotic state of affairs. The plea for further investigation was merely a subterfuge, as Parliament's attention has been repeatedly drawn by Departmental reports, annually ana otherwise, to the enormous losses and potential deficits, if steps were not taken to grapple with the problem. Ample evidence is already available to those capable of understanding to show that regulation of transport is long overdue. "There were other clauses iv the Bill to which Mr. Ansell apparently did not refer, and I am not surprised at that. These clauses were desired and welcomed by all sections of the motorin°community as tending to more efficient and harmonious administration, and extending consideration and convenience to motorists not enjoyed previously. I would refer particularly to the proposal to issue motor-drivers' licences by the Post Office. This would have eliminated the present inconvenience imposed on close on two hundred thousand holders of motor-drivers' licences in having to obtain their drivers' licences and number-plates from different authorities. Various other hardships were removed, and I feel .lurothat motorists generally, and particularly those in the South Island, will find it difficult to reconcile the actions of Mr. Ansell as member of Parliament and Mr. Ansell as president of the South Island Motor Union. In his general hostility to the Bill he has helped to deprive "the private motorist of many desirable changes in the present law, and has supported opposition to legislation, an impartial review of which will show clearly was in the interests of the Dominion and in keeping with recognised necessities m other countries.'