ROAD TRANSPORT

Evening Post, Volume CXXXII, Issue 70, 19 September 1941, Page 7

ROAD TRANSPORT

MERGER COMPANIES

ALLEGATION OF COERCION

MINISTER'S DENIAL

The contention that transport operators had been coerced into joining mergers, in some cases by . threats that their licences would be cancelled if they did not come in, was made by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Holland) in the House of Representatives this morning during consideration of the Transport Department's estimates. In Canterbury in particular sixteen tor seventeen operators had Jeen Sorced into a merger whether they liked it or not, said Mr. Holland. They Siad been told by the licensing authority and. the Department that if they )did not come in they ran a risk of Bosing their licences. There was the : base of North Canterbury' Transport. seventeen operators had all been trading successfully but they were forced into a merger and ■* formed a company with a capital of !£25,000 or £30,000 and their rates were ifixed by the licensing authority. The result was that the company lasted ten tnonths and its equipment and capital had all gone, and it was even a fact that the .operators had to buy back their vehicles which they had prefviously paid fqr. ALMOST BANKRUPT. Mr. Holland said he would ask that tyhen the operators concerned approached the Department they would be given very favourable consideration ..." an getting their individual licences v back. Mr. H. Si S, Kyle (National, Ripcar- '? Ion) said he knew of an individual =■- faith a licence who had been informed .., < py the licensing authority that he had to increase his charges as he was not making sufficient, and yet where "mergers had been forced an almost •bankrupt state was reached. Mr. W. J. Poison (National, Stratford) said that organisation of transport was-essential these days, but the fcoercive^ method adopted by some "licensing authorities was to be condemned. ,He paid a tribute to the re- ;:. suits achieved on a voluntary basis by the authority for Taranaki and Wellington. - MINISTER'S REPLY. The Minister of Transport (Mr. Semple), in reply, said that there had fciever been any suggestion on the part I" bf the Government or himself of ~ forcing anybody' to do anything he \ 'did : not want to do. The transport! company referred to by Mr, Holland "was a veyy unfortunate case and he Vanted to point out that thert were ~; E5 merger companies in New Zealand t ". and that was the only failure. He did . not know whether the operators were . coerced or not. The company had flopped but the men' were somewhat to blame themselves. ~ • However, he did not propose to give the House details which might be detrimental to the men ..in the future. He could assure the Leader of the Opposition that the men concerned in the ' , failure of the company would get "a fair spin:" ; If spme licensing authorities were coercing the';; operators they fected "on their own bat" and without. Instructions from the Department, He JpOUld - say definitelyl that the merger Companies had done much, to eliminate- ■'. waste. ; . ' ',•,-■■ ■. ■•■-: ■ ■~ •