Evening Post TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 1937.

Evening Post, Volume CXXIII, Issue 51, 2 March 1937, Page 8

Evening Post TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 1937.

AN IDEAL AND PRACTICE

We have much sympathy with the aim of the Minister of Railways for the constitution of a completely coordinated and efficient system of transport. Long before the present Government took office we pointed to the necessity for control and co-opera-tion which would bring order out of the chaos that was coming through the speedy development of road-borne traffic. To introduce that order the Reform Government instituted licensing of motor transport. This was at first applied only to passenger vehicles; but was extended to goods traffic when the Transport Department had studied the operation of the new. law and the principles embodied in the British Salter Conference report. Later still, as a step in the same direction, the railways were removed from .political control, so that the prime purpose of efficiency in transport should not be hampered by political burdens placed upon the railways which must continue to be the main support of the transport system. The aim throughout was to establish a system in which traffic would be shared on economic considerations among the different parts of the transport system, that going to the railways which could be most economically rail-borne, that to the roads where the convenience of door-to-door service was worth the cost, and that to shipping which having regard to all.factors of handling and harbour charges should be sea-borne. The achievement was far short of the aim when the Coalition Government left office. Road taxation, which we have always held should be the foundation of an economic system of traffic allocation, had not been revised. The co-operation and consultation between the operators of different forms of transport was short of that essential for the direction of a well-co-ordinated system. Licensing was in the experimental stage, with the principles governing it not well defined. The Labour Government has continued the development of control mainly upon the lines that were being followed before, but with a different emphasis which may yet be found to effect radical changes in the plan. The railways have been brought again under political control, with the Government of the day again free to add new lines and new works, imposing fresh capital charges. Licensing has been centralised in such a form that the political head of; the Transport Department may hold the balance between the State-owned railways and the privately-operated motors. Coordination is taking on more of the appearance of nationalisation. There is a trend, though at present it is not a rapid movement, towards monopoly instead of controlled competition. With this trend in mind, one is prompted to seek an amplification of the statement by the Minister of Railways at Palmerston North that "it was only common sense that all forms of transport —rail, road, sea, and air—should be organised into one complete whole." If the Minister means that there should be such coordination and co-operation that every part of the system is used to the best advantage we can agree with him; but if he means that all transport should be nationalised, to form one huge State monopoly, we cannot agree. We hold very strongly that controlled competition is ■ still most essential to assist in determining the allocation" of traffic, maintaining a high standard of efficiency, and holding the balance between users and operators of transport services. This necessity is made abundantly clear by consideration of the Government's policy as made known hitherto, and the Minister's plans as outlined at Palmerston. Already the Government is adding to the capital cost of the railways by constructing new lines of doubtful value. It proposes to undertake further heavy expenditure in additions to lines, buildings, plant, and equipment. .If this expenditure promotes efficiency, well and good. The railways must continue for many years the backbone of the transport system, and the service given must be the best attainable. But we are firmly convinced that competition is required to check expenditure which is uneconomic and to test the value of the constructive work undertaken. In an undertaking subject to no competitive test of value it will be very easy for political pressure to overload capital cost, and simply pass the bill on to the public, knowing that they, must pay one way or another. But if the Government establishes a monopoly and calls it co-ordination, it will not therefore be co-ordination, and no one will be able to say whether it is economic. Competition is equally necessary as a means of balancing the demands of employees and the rights of users in a service. The Minister of Railways put before his railway audience at Palmerston a double ideal: high efficiency and humanised relations in the service. "In the Department," he said, "discipline was absolutely essential, and not less work but more work was required by the Labour Government if the Labour Party's ideals for raising the standard of life of not only the railwaymen but all members of the community were to be achieved." This implies an equal division of the benefits of modernised transport; a fair reward to those who operate any part of the service,

and cheaper and better service for users, State monopoly does not dispose at once of this problem. It may be regarded as substituting a system "based on service" for one "based on profit" if the railways, with some excuse about service, are relieved of the awkward necessity of paying, interest on capital. But it may create another problem in which profit for the operators becomes more important (because of the political pressure of a closelyorganised body) than cheapness of service to unorganised users. With no commercial and independent buffer between organised workers and the political representatives of the owners, it becomes more essential than ever that there should be some rule or standard for division of benefits between users and operators. A competitive service (with sufficient control to prevent competition being wastefully excessive) helps to provide the standard and the public safeguard. .