FARMERS’ UNION.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVI, Issue 304, 21 November 1936, Page 10

FARMERS’ UNION.

TRANSPORT CHARGES DISCUSSED The Feilding branch of the Farmers’ Union, at a meeting held yesterday afternoon, discussed at length the proposed new transport charges to be fixed by the Feilding branch of the New Zealand Transport Alliance. Mr J. H. Mason presided Over a good attendance. A letter from the New Zealand Road Transport Alliance (Feilding branch) was received, in which the writers pointed out that copies of a price schedule to be submitted to the Licensing Authority were enclosed, and intimated that where increases were suggested they were moderate and only in Keeping with the costs incurred in performing the particular services. The letter also stated that the alliance was prepared to discuss the new charges with the Farmers’ Union at their meeting. The meeting decided to listen to the proposals of the local branch as explained by the secretary (Mr S. McDowall) and Mr C. E. Robinson (the representative appointed by the Operators’ Association). Mr McDowall said that it was clear that the Railway Department intended to take over the route transport business, but that the area licenses would be allowed to remain and would be subject to restrictions regarding hours, wages, loading, inspection of vehicles, etc. Furthermore, the Government intended to juit a stop to the price-cutting practice. The proposed system of price schedule fixation was not to be confined to the Feilding district, but the Government aimed at co-ordinating transport throughout New Zealand, and operators, through their district alliances, were expected to decide upon the prices to be charged. The proposed new scale of charges for transport of live stock showed very little variation from the existing scale of charges, but that any slight adjustment had been made necessary on account of higher wages and charges which operators were forced to pay under the legislation. Mr McDowall added that the Longburn freezing works proprietors had accepted the proposed new charges without demur. Mr J. B. Bradley said that he understood some of the operators were opposed to the Transport Alliance. Mr McDowall, in reply, stated that it was a voluntary organisation and not compulsory under the transport regulations. Only three operators had voiced their disapproval of the organisation. Mr K. M. Little questioned the fairness of the general conditions under which the operator could charge 10s an hour waiting time after having waited half an hour. There was no provision made for a similar stipulation in the event of a farmer having to wait for the lorries to come along, he said. , Mr McDowall said that some protection was necessary for the operator, and lie cited an instance wherein a farmer had ordered four lorries anci only two had been needed. There was no compensation for the two lorries unused. Mr Tappin said that the buyers should have a knowledge of how many lorries were needed, and the fault did not lie with the farmer. Mr Bradley was of the opinion that the producer had to “pay the piper” and any additional charges would fall on him. The farmer could not pass the cost on. Mr McDowall pointed out that the alliance was not antagonistic to the

farmer, but that the operators were asking for a fair scale of charges, the proposal was in the plastic stage at present, and might be amended, but the operators’ position required to be explained, and their business based on a proper looting. Mr B. McLeod said he could see in the proposed new scale an increased cost to the farmers who, lie thought, would be resorting to the use of their old cars lor conveying their produce, and drovers’ services would be availed of. . After a further discussion, the meeting decided to oppose the proposed fixed charges, members being of the opinion that the arrangements made in the past between the farmer and carrier had proved satisfactory. ,