TELEGRAMS

Hokitika Guardian, 27 June 1935, Page 5

TELEGRAMS

MINISTER’S REPLY AGAINST FLAT RATE CHARGE, (By Telegraph—Per Favour' of Government). WELLINGTON, June 26. “Those who advocate the flat rnfe charge for telegrams are trying to induce the Department to revert to a policy which it very patiently tried at great loss, and with the most disappointing results,” declared Hon. Adam Hamilton (Postmaster-General) in a further statement on the siihjpcl of telegraph charges to-dav.. Incorrect conclusions, said the Minister, wore being published regarding the result of the Department’s departure from the flat system of charging for telegrams. Some critics were quoting the general recovery of . business in the Post Office, and were suggesting that, had the old flat rate been retained, there would have been a proportionate increase the number of telegrams sent. “It will interest these prophets to know,’’ continued the Minister, “that for many years, not only in New Zealand but in most other countries, the number of telegrams handled has been regularly decreasing. Yet, m New Zealand, under the new scheme of charging in line with service, this backward tendency has been corrected. There has been an increase during the last two months (under the new scale of charges) of G per cent. in the volume of telegraph business, and exactly the same percentage of improvement in the value. This is 11 practical indication that the present Bchomn is a balanced one, and fairer t () tlio telegraph users, and that, as a whole, they are finding it more suitable- O'Ci 35,000 more telegrams were sent last April and May than during the corresponding two months of 1934. “The flat rate system of charging has had a long trial in New Zealand. In 1923, the flat rate was reduced from Is to 9d, and was thus given a much better chance of demonstrating its popularity, but with what result? Erom that time onwards until 1939, l he loss on the telegraphic, side became progressivclv worse, the slight stimulation in business due to the concession I ailing fm behind the decrease m revenue which it caused. Obviously, this 'experience could not encourage the Department to further experiments, leading, possibly to a sixpenny telegram This would liavc been as little justified bv the hard facts as the selling of ordinary commodities by business men at below cost, price, merely to achieve a spectacular result in .be way of increased turnover. So far as them own affairs are concerned, they of course endeavour to make , their charges correspond with the cost of service rendered, which is exactly what the Department is trying to do in eomijcction with its telegraphic business.

“It has been suggested, in parts of the South Island, and particularly in Dunedin, that the variable rate for telegraphic work has seriously handicapped the business community of that part of the Dominion of increasing the cost of communicating with North Island towns. Those who hav e expressed that view would bo wise to Due info account the great advantage they enjoy over their Auckland competitors in• communicating with their own customers and clients who live within the range of telegraphic cliaregs lower than the maximum. At the other end of the Dominion, one may quote the opinion of the Auckland Chainher of Commerce, which, after investigating the operation of the present system, the opin.on that the .Department- has done the fight thing. Would our southern critics carry their advocacy of flat dates of freight, so that the business people in other parts of the Dominion could compete with them on absolutely equal terms? flho\ accept as inevitable and economically sound a variable charge for transport. Nor has there been any expressed objection to the toll charges for telephone communication strictly «*• Hue with distance.

“Every effort has been made to improve the financial position of the Department’s telegraphic business. . The most economical and efficient methods of dealing with the traffic have been introduced, and the whole system has been under constant scrutiny with the object of keeping down costs, but without success. Li the balance of the accounts during the last ton years the loss on the telegraph service has amounted to £1,('43,684. Assuming that the critics of the present telegraphic system are not anxious to obtain !>enoj fits at the expense of those wlm use ! other postal services, a flat rate would have to he imposed fairly, representing I the all-round cost; and this, despite

hiehlv efficient "operative methods, and the use of modern equipment, could not lie less than Is 2d lor twelve words, regardless of the destination of the message; but under such a system many telegraph users would he unfairly penalised by having to pay a proportion of the cost of services given to others.” ,