RAIL V. SEA

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 34, 9 August 1933, Page 8

RAIL V. SEA

UNFAIR COMPETITION?

WANGANUI RESOLUTIONS

LOSS OjNt COASTAL TKADE

After a deputation from the Wanganui Harbour Board had outlined its case .for concerted protest against what was termed unfair competition on tho part of the Railway Department, the following resolutions were passed at last night's meeting of the Wanganui Chamber of Commerce at which Mr. A. S. Burgess presided, reports the "Wanganui Chronicle": — That this chamber views with grave apprehension the iinceonomie competition of the Eailway Department with coastal ports, thereby creating a huge national loss. That if it is the intention of the Department to continue the policy of hiring trucks, similar facilities and privileges bo granted from Wanganui outwards as are in force or to be brought from Wellington outwards. That this chamber requests tlio Railways Board to meet the Harbours Association and Shipping Federation at the earliest possible opportunity, as arranged .at the recent conference held in Wanganui. That the Railways Board be asked at once' .to state its policy in regard to the coastal shipping and coastal ports. That this chamber support the Harbour Board in its efforts to preserve and protect the trade of the port of Wanganui and will join with it iv any steps taken in this direction. Outlining the position as it appeared to tho Harbour Board, Mr. W. J. Gardner (secretary) gave details of the Eailway Department's proposals with regard to the hiring of trucks, reports "The Chronicle." For the transport of goods from Wellington to Palmerston North, he said, an 8-toh truck could bo_ hired for £4 10s, and there was no restriction as to the class of goods to be carried or as to the rate of freight. In this way highways transport firms and carrying companies entered into unfair competition with the ports, and the coastaj companies were also adversely affected. By this arrangement with the Eailway. Department the carrying firm was in a position to handle goods under two tons at 30s a ton or two tons or over at 25s a ton, tho Department getting lls 3d for haulage and the carrier, for picking up and. delivering, 18s 9d a ton for the smaller quantity and 13s 9d for the larger quantity. Just what this amounted to, Mr. Gardner pointed out, would be realised by consideration of the fact that cartage to the station at Wellingtpn (3s 6d a ton), cartage to warehouse at Palmerston North (3s), and the railway charge, for loading truck (Is sd) amounted to 7s lid, which was the amount for which the Railway / Department could get the job done. Yet in allowing the carrier 18s 9d and 13s 9d at the respective rates they were practicaljy giving a subsidy of 10s lOd and 5s 10d in the respective instances. In sonjp classes of goods handled by the port .of Wangajittj. a charge of 27s 6d a ton. from Wanganui to Palmerston North included sorting at Wanganui anij delivery at Palmerston North with certain exceptions. In the same classes the charge from Wellington to Palmerston North was 40s a ton. DEDUCTIONS FROM WHARFAGE. Figures quoted by Mr. Gardner relative to the Eailway Department's charges deducted from wharfage fit Wanganui, showed that, in commission and handling charges, the Department had received £4486 in 1929 for handling 110,295 tons, amounting to 29.9 por cpnt. of the total wharfage, while for the ten months from October 1, 1932, to July 31, 1933, £2213 had been deducted for handling 44,985 tons, thfs being equivalent to 32.7 per cent, of the total wharfage. The rate for 1932-33 was estimated to produce £14,847, and the, loss on coastal trade was £6254. After referring to the loss of business suffered by the coastal trade,. Mr. Gardner said that if the port was to tie successful Wanganui would have to put a stop to unfair competition by the: railways. In answer to a question, Mr. Gardner stated that a contract for twelve months' carrying had been signed a month ago. DIFFERENTIATION IN FREIGHTS, "This deputation has' placed before us on a larger scalp what we know as the sugar case," said Mr. Burgess. "Members will remember our contention that charging 37s Cd a ton railage on sugar from Auckland to Wanganui was unfair when the rate to Taihapo from Auckland was £2 9s 6d. If reasonable rates were charged we would not have anything to say on the subject, but the rates quoted are either unfair to Wanganui or unfair to Taihape, If the Eailway Department's policy is allowed to operate without a protest the trade of the port will be swept away. It would be the ruination of the port, and with the Harbour Board's indebtedness of some £500,000 the ratepayer would then have to pay. It would, in addition, affect some of the industries in Wanganui, such as the fertiliser works." "The shipping companies will fight if this unfair competition is allowed," concluded Mr. Burgess. It would cost £30,000 to provide sheds and wharfage accommodation at Castleeliff, pointed out Mr. J. Patterson, a member of the deputation. "Wang^nui should consider that, on Mr, Gardner's figures, wp will lose all our coastal shipping," said Mr. Morrison. "We would soon have no port at all. You'll find it will pay us well to do as has been suggested." MOVE TO CENTRALISE, "You know as well as I do that the shipping companies had on foot a demovement to centralise shipping at Wellington," said Mr. W, J. Eogers. Mr. Burgess: You're wrong there. Mr. J, T. liogan pointed out that it appeared to be a case oft extended nationalism, as had beon experienced in many eouutries in Europe. They had found that the Railways Board could not be tied down to a policy of a higher rate for a longer haul. It might, however, ho suggested that tho same policy be permitted'at this end as was being sanctioned from Wellington. They should be allowed to hire trucks to distribute goods through the district from Wanganui Port. When the Harbour Board had endeavoured to get legislation for permission to develop the port at Castlocliff the business people of Wangaitai, without knowledge of the facts, sighed a petition against the proposed legislation. Now these socalled business people wanted the very thing they had petitioned against. At least, concluded Mr. Hogan, they could get a conference with the people most interested. / Mr. O. P. Brown said that the transport people had their appeal board and it could be suggested that tho coastal shipping companies be allowed an equal chance of appealing. After a little further discussion the deyratatiou retired to formulate the resolutions already detailed, and on their return the resolutions were carried unanimously.