The Evening Star THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1930. THE TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT.

Evening Star, Issue 20610, 9 October 1930, Page 8

The Evening Star THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1930. THE TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT.

It is correct, as one member of Parliament stated in yesterday’s debate, that transport co-ordination was put in the forefront of tho Government’s programme. It has not been kept there, though probably not from failure to appreciate the vital importance of the matter. In this year’s Budget a promise was given that legislation would be introduced this session, based on investigations, both here and abroad, by the Transport Department. The setting up of that department last session was as far as the Government was then allowed to go in the matter. The fact that it is not quite ready with its recommendations for Parliament to build legislation on suggests that the subject is full of difficulties, and that precipitate action, with the attendant risks of dislocation of the .competing systems, is something from which Parliament should be restrained. It is, however, disappointing that the Transport Department, which, according to the Minister, has been working hard, cannot yet proffer proofs of its toil. Mr Taverner outlined the heads the report would follow, and assured members that they would find the document full of interest. This is merely adding to their dissatisfaction in being asked to pass tho Estimates of the Transport Department before handling the report of its doings, and it is now more than ever certain that, so far as legislation goes, the matter will again have to stand over, and perhaps bo studied by members during tho recess. Seeing that Mr Coates in his Railways Statement of 1928 published an appendix on ‘ Tho Co-ordination of Transport,’ this is disappointingly slow progress. Almost necessarily this was mainly a review of the lines on which other countries had been working. Since then experience has been greatly enlarged, and reams of literature have beeon published on the subject, but one ,has yet to hear of working compromises which have given general satisfaction in actual operation. For that reason alone it is almost certain that when the New Zealand Parliament comes to legislate tho business will prove a very contentious one, and under the arrangement before Mr Forbes left this compels its being held over. Under the circumstances complaints by certain members that they are being denied the opportunity they crave have not a genuine ring. If they were to be taken at their word and compelled to stay in Wellington until their task had been faithfully performed, they would before long be complaining yet more loudly and much more sincerely. It is admitted that duplication of services means that through higher rates and taxes and increased prices for commodities and fares working costs of farmers, manufacturers, and distributors, and generally the price of goods and cost of travelling to all sections of the community are much greater than they need be. And the possibility of their going yet higher cannot be ignored. Only a few days ago the Railways Commission recommended practically an all-round raising of fares and freights. With the present relatively unrestricted competition that would hardly be a solution of the railways’ financial difficulties. The presumption is that the commissioners relied on transport legislation to impose severe restrictions on road services, thus in part restoring to tho railways their one-timo monopoly. That, however, is not the direction which most people desire to see being pursued. The Main Highways Board is spending nearly two and one-third millions sterling a year on road constmctiou and maintenance. A large, yet perhaps nob yet sufficient, proportion of that money is derived from road users, and it is hardly likely that they will sit down quietly under restrictions so severe that they cannot economically compete with railways Charging higher rates than at present. Nor would the trading public easily surrender some of the undoubted despatch and convenience tho development of road traffic has brought. Undoubtedly in this competition there are also elements of irresponsibility and piracy, and it is the unenviable task of transport co-ordinators to preserve the good while eliminating the bad elements. It cannot be conceded that moto • transport is to be forbidden merely because it takes traffic from the railways, and so increases the railway deficit. In some cases the maintenance of railway facilities might involve the community in a greater economic loss than persevering with a redundant service. This is recognised even by the Railways Commission, which recommends the closing of some nan-paying branch lines or the provision of reduced services on them ahd leaving the rest of the traffic to motor transport. On the other hand, any claim of private transport interests that there should be no restrictions to prevent their skimming the cream of the traffic cannot be sustained. There will have to he some compromise, since it has been shown that the community cannot afford both forms of transport on the one route. To allot spheres of operation for railway and road transport requires careful investigation into the nob costs and benefits of tho two forms of transport

to the State as a whole. South Australia in 1927 took power to prescribe tho rputes and operations of rord services, both passenger and freight, but discarded that power in 1928. Queensland prescribed licenses five times as heavy for motor vehicles competing with tho railways as for those which do not. Victoria has only now begun to consider restrictions on road transport other than the (ineffective) limitation of speed. In most countries there is a system of permits contingent on public convenience and necessity and tho safeguarding of existent public transport facilities. Tho most practicable method would appear to he the formation of a State Road Trust independent of the railways, empowered to engage in the transport business' itself. Experiment has shown that where the railway authorities in any country have embarked on road transport operations these have been conducted at maximum expense and have failed to achieve simplified control.