THE TRANSPORT BOARD.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20421, 25 November 1929, Page 14

THE TRANSPORT BOARD.

Sir, —The critics of the Transport Board have had a good innings, and it appears to me that it is time we had a look at tho other side of the picture: The board controls one of the largest trading concerns in the Dominion, empjoying a large number of men. It has to study the interests of the travelling public, the ratepayers and the staff. The interests of no one section should bo paramount, and from what I can see the board is dealing justly and fairly with all concerned. It would be easy to favour, say, the travelling public at the expense of the ratepayers, but would it be just and- right ? I am satisfied that the board is doing the right thing, and it has my support. Epsom.

Sir, —As a suburbanite I resent an increase in tram fares. But your correspondent "Remuera," in Monday's Herald, would accentuate the trouble, bringing in sharp competition." In the transport of any city co-operation, properly controlled, is wanted, not competition at all. One pood thing to the credit of the present Transport Board is that it has realised that in a large city, not buses but tramways alone can cope with the peak load of traffic. Furthermore, it is determined to extend all tramways that lead into populous areas, and if it follows this policy, obliterating competition, there is no reason why trams should not pay and fares be lowered again. It is largely car owners who advise pulling up tram sails, and the pedestrian and noncar owner should beware of what would happen to his pocket if it was to come to pass that he had only buses to rely on. lie may live on the cross-roads and have a little walk to the tram, but he or she is all the better in health for that. The Wellington people walk more than Aucklanders, and let me tell the ladies here the Southerners have neater ankles. Traveller.

Sir, —Tho letter in Saturday's issue by Mr. P. Alexander shows the necessity for tho public generally to realise the true position. I do not blame anyone for criticising any matter provided the criticism is not malicious or based on ignoranco of facts. For some years past, I have taken a keen interest in City Council matters, and I would like to givo the following facts for Mr. Alexander's enlightenments. When tho tramways were purchased, I believe in 1919, Mr. W. J. Iloldsworth was made chairman of the committee. About 1921 Mr. G. It. Hutchinson became chairman, which position ho held until 1925. In the latter year Mr. Thompson was appointed chairman, which position he lost when he was defeated in tho 1927 election. It was then that Mr. Allum took up the position, and from what I can see of it, he is being criticised for taking actions necessary to straighten out tho mistakes made before ho took tho job on. I have heard many of Mr. Allum's public utterances, and it is to his credit that he has never tried to throw any blame on to any of those who had the job beforo him; iu fact, I think ho has been unfair to himself in not reminding the public of tho position. Even Mr. Bloodworth takes credit for the passing of the Motor Omnibus Traffic Act and does not blame Mr. Allum for this piece of legislation which rightly or wrongly so incensed tho public. The Transport Board has not yet' been in operation twelve months, and I repeat (hat they should havo a fair trial. Mr. Albert.

Sir, —Your correspondent Mr. P. Alexander must have a short memory. If ho has followed the public statements of Mr Allum he will know that that gentleman has stated on more than one occasion that the members of the City Council who are members of the Transport Board had had no direct connection with the tramways until 1927. Does he remember Mr. Allum's attitude in the City Council a few years ago when lie urged justice for the buses and presented to tho council an enormous petition asking for fair play for them ? In my opinion it was unfortunate that Mr. Allum was away in England when tho Motor Omnibus Traffic Act was enacted, as I believo his policy of adopting ordinary business methods to deal with the bus competition would have succeeded and tho unpopular Act would have been unnecessary. It is all to Mr. Allum's credit that when lie took up tho chairmanship of tho Tramway Committee two years ago lie obviously did liis best to deal with a" situation for which he was not responsible and which was largely brought about by a policy of which ho did not approve. a"H business men have had a trying time during tho past two or three years and it must have been particularly trying for Mr. Allum and his colleagues, who have been called upon to handle a problem which is world-wide and arises at a time of general depression in business. I notice no reference to the position, sinco Mr. Allum and his colleagues took control. In 1924-25 £20,000 was lost, in 1525-26 £28,560 loss, in 1926-27 £41,000 loss, whereas last year there was a profit of £I4OO. The board has adopted the policy of running the show without a call on the ratepayers, and it should certainly bo supported in this action and be given a fair chance. Naws.