OBJECTS OF AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATIONS

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXVI, 1 May 1934, Page 2

OBJECTS OF AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATIONS

(To the Editor) Sir,—l have no intention of entering into an endless correspondence on this matter and this is my last letter on this subject. Mr Cyril Rout’s letter reads like a plausible excuse for a most unjust act. I agree with him and it is a great pity that there is very little interest taken in matters by the general members of the N.A.A. though possibly there is a reason. I can only repeat that I believe had the Automobile Associations fought this iniquitous Act matters would have been different. Was it not unwise to put a prominent member of an A.A. on a Transport Board? Has not this had the effect of tying the hands of the A.A.’s? Mr Rout admits that the Act is working harshly on some.

Now for a personal application of the Act! Suppose for the sake of argument Mr Rout and other vicepresidents of the N.A.A. were all running motor services? How would either of them like to be. told by the local board, the chairman of which is also President of the, N.A.A. that one or mbre had to give up his licence and go off the road! What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Extend the principles of the Transport Act to the private car owners and see where it lands you. We would then have the A.A.’s up in arms. I notice that the Murchison Motors have'set Mr Rout some job. (Personally I do not know them and to my knowledge they do not know me). I go even further than they do and I say they have as much right to be on the King’s Highway as anyone else, even to the chairman of a Transport Board or any president or vicepresident or member of any Automobile Association. All this talk of economic transport control is mere eyewash to try to excuse monopoly. I thank Mr Neale for his information re debates. I also apologise to Dr Gibbs if I have misjudged him, but I have always looked upon the N.A.A. as a body prepared to discuss matteVs in an open and friendly jnamier. I would never rise to a point of order if some fresh light could he brought out. I have not looked on the Association as a debating society. If the .chairman intended to adhere strictly to the rules of debate he should have ruled fylr Cyril Rout out of order as he (Dr Gibbs) was in charge of the meeting. At least this is the humble opinion of yours etc., 11. C. BARLTROP Nelson, 30th April.