TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

Evening Star, Issue 22881, 12 February 1938, Page 19

TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

SITTING AT BALCLUTHA A sitting of No. 4 Transport Licensing Authority was held in the courthouse at Balclutha yesterday, Mr V. Raines presiding. Mr A. Clark (district traffic manager) and Mr N. S. Dew (business agent) represented the Railway Department. The chief business was the consideration of transport prices as proposed by the south branch of the Transport Alliance, and that much interest was taken in this was evidenced by the_ large attendance of farmers, carriers, and others. Mr R. R. Grigor appeared for Messrs Leonard and Son. while Mr J. T. Walter represented the Milton, Lawrence, Hillend, Greenfield, Clydevale, and Awamangu branches of the Farmers’ Union, Mr A. Renton the Balclutha branch, Mr W. Walker the Heriot and Tapanui branches, and Mr D. T. Fleming the Clutha River Board. The Transport Alliance was represented by Messrs J. I. G. Somerville and H. H. Lyall. In reply to Mr Walter, the Chairman explained proceedings leading up to the sitting that day. At a sitting on January 21 Mr Somerville had put forward a schedule of charges that had been approved at a meeting of licensed carriers, only one carrier protesting. This showed that there might be some up-river settlers who would have to pay a little more, as at present they had an alternative service and operators had been trying to compete with this. The sitting had been adjourned to give the various branches of the Farmers’ Union and others interested an opportunity of discussing the schedule. The licensing authorities had recommended to the Minister that price schedules should be adopted in each district, and once they were fixed they would be included in the license and had to be adhered to, Where an agreement could not be come to between the farmers’ unions and the other body the licensing authority, after hearing evidence, would set up the schedule. He took it that those represented that day had seen the schedule. , Mr Somerville ■ outlined what had been done, and said a slight variation had been made since the adjournment. It was agreed that Milton district be permitted to retain its own price list as arranged with the Farmers’ Union. He submitted a list of farmers in the district and the prices arranged for carting sheep and lambs to the freezing works. These were based on previous years and showed an increase of id per head from Tuapeka Mouth and Clydevale, while in other cases they were less. Mr Walter asked if it was the Authority’s intention to include the whole of South Otago in the schedule. The Milton Farmers’ Union had a different schedule. The Chairman suggested that Milton’s case be heard on another day, and this was agreed to. Mr Walker pointed but that Heriot and Tapanui carriers belonged to the Gore Carriers’ Association, and he wanted to know if they were to be bound by the South Otago Association. The Chairman said there was to be a sitting at Invercargill next week, and the Tapanui carriers could be heard there. Mr Walter said the Milton people were interested in sheep transport, and were very concerned, so much so that they thought they might have to drive their stock. '

Mr Grigor said his clients should hare an opportunity of seeing the new list. They had done 48 per cent, of the sheep carrying to the freezer last season, while the Clutha River Board had been responsible for 60 per cent. The chairman adjourned the sitting for a period to allow the schedule to be considered by those who had not seen it, and in doing so said that he would make no definite decision that day. He intended to compare the schedules from Southland, Gore, Waimate, Oamaru, Fairlie, and South Otago before coming to any finality. On resuming Mr Walter stated that the farmers’ unions could come to no unanimous agreement, and the chairman said he would call evidence on the matters in dispute. Mr Walter then said that there were two carriers not in the association (River Board and Leonard’s) who had a schedule substantially less than that of' the association. They were efficient carriers, and it would simplify matters if they placed their scale before the authority. Mr D. T. Fleming (secretary of the River Board) said that their scale showed a decrease of Is a _ mile up to three miles, 6d up to 12 miles, and 3d a mile over 12. His board considered the new charges higher than they should be. They also thought that the rates for lambs fixed in 1936 should be adhered to, being £d a head less than those proposed. Mr Grigor said Leonard had been on the road 40 years carrying general goods, first with traction engines and later with motor vehicles. They had worked on prices satisfactory to customers and themselves, and he maintained that these prices should stand. Regarding wool and lambs, the cartage for these last year was based on the zone system, and was rather Jess than the first list put in by the association. Alex. Leonard said they had gone carefully into the prices proposed for cartage of general goods, and his firm’s list showed reductions of Is a mile up to six miles, 6d up to 12 miles, and 3d thereafter. He considered they could make carrying pay at these prices. They would not oppose the slight increase in the wool charges, as they handled a small quantity. As for lambs, they were prepared to work on last year’s schedule.

In reply to the chairman, witness said that under their schedule they could pay award rates to all employees and also allowed for depreciation of vehicles. Taking the class of roads and conditions generally, his firm considered the zone system better than the mileage system'for charging. To Mr Walter: He had not taken into consideration the decreased prices for sheep and wool secured by the farmers. He did not think the new schedule would affect sheep traffic, but thought less lime and manures would he carted. Mr E. Hayman (Tuapeka Mouth) asked witness if they would cart on the old basis if a farmer held his wool so as to give him a full load. Some might also arrange for back loading. In reply to the chairman, Mr Somerville said there ivas so little back loading that the association had not considered it worth while to include this in the proposed schedule. Mr J. S. White (Hillend F.U.) said the schedule proposed by the River Board and Leonard’s was approved by his union for general goods. Production would go back if the prices asked by the association came into force, as farmers could not afford to pay those. Wool did not affect them a great deal. They considered the 1936 price for lamb cartage too high by id a head, while the association’s proposed charges were Id too high, ff the price for lamb carting were reduced the other prices submitted by the two carriers were in order.

Mr A. Craig (Greenfield F.U.) said the association's rates ior general goods were prohibitive, and production would go back if they were carried. The schedules of the Biver Board and Leonard’s were reasonable, except for wool, which should carry a reduction for a full load or back loading. If the proposed charges went on they would put him out of wheat growing, as they would make a difference of 2Jd a bushel. To the Chairman: The price of wheat was fixed at 5s a bushel, irrespective of cost of production. Mr H. D. Cooksley (Clydevale Farmers’ Union) gave evidence on a similar strain. He said liming would bo debarred, as the price would be too high. He pointed out that the price of lambs was back 5s a head, while wool had dropped very nearly 50 per cent. Mr T. M’Caw (Waitahuna and Lawrence Farmers’ Union) said his branches were opposed to the surcharge of 3d a ton. It was not justified, and they were behind the other unions in having the old rates retained. They had been paying more than the proposed rates, but they had been paying too much. Mr D. M'Elrea (Milton Farmers’ Union) said they were not against last year’s rates for lambs, but they would oppose any increase, as prices for lambs had gone down. Mr A. Renton (Clutha Farmers’ Union) said his union were more concerned over the short distance charges. Prices for carting had gone up Is 3d a ton for general goods during the past few years. They considered the rates for lambs too dear, but the ether rates were reasonable. Mr A. F. Pannett (Clydevale) pointed out that if some inducement was given farmers would- go to a good deal of trouble to give back loading. They had no encouragement at present. The Chairman said he agreed that some reduction should be given for back loading. He wished to arrive at a fair basis, as freights were hitting the farmers hard, particularly on long distances. He would like the farmers present to understand that neither Mr Somerville nor any other lorry owne'rs were fixing the prices. They had been asked to submit a schedule and had done so. was pleased to see so many farmers present and to hear them back their evidence with facts. He knew he could not satisfy them all, but he would try to give a fair decision. There was no question about farmers’ returns being down. Wages and costs all came into the matter, and it was a question whether the rates should be based on these costs or on what the farmer could pay. It would be a few weeks yet before he could give his decision. In reply to Mr Joseph Mosley, the Chairman said they would carry on under the old rates till his decision was available. There had been no new scale fixed.