ALBERT STREET TRAMS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20596, 21 June 1930, Page 15

ALBERT STREET TRAMS.

REPLY TO CRITICISM.

TRANSPORT BOARD'S POLICY. THE QUESTION OF FINANCES. Mr. Robert A. Laidlaw, president of the West of Queen Street Business Men's Association, writes:— On reading Mr. Kitchener's figures through one's first impression is that if they are true the sooner the Albert Street outlet is opened up the better, because very careful computations have shown that Albert Street will not only carry the charges on the capital expended, but will actually show a surplus! If the undertaking were showing a profit of half a million per annum it could afford to shut its eyes to the economies to be effected by the Albert Street outlet, and still maintain the Queen Street congestion, which, as Mr. Kitchener shows so clearly, is cutting down the number of passengers who travel and the mileage that it is possible to run in spite of having an increased number of cars on the road. Why should the Transport Board not be complimented rather than condemned for doing just what a private company would do if it found its undertaking in the same condition ? It would seek to increase the passengers carried by speeding up its service, and cut down its overhead by eliminating shifts made possible by the faster rervice. This was made very clear in Mr. Ford's report on the Albert Street outlet as submitted to the Transport Board. Comment on Figures. Having said this, let us look at Mr. Kitchener's figures. He states that the increase in capital expenditure from 1927 to 1930 was £447,683. I find on looking up the City Council report of 1927 that the total capital account at that date amounted to £1,744,129, made up as under:— Capital expenditure . . . i 1,615,937 Track renewal suspense . . 30,821 Loan flotation expenses . . 3-1,P39 Assets realisation a/c B. . . 29,532 £1.744.129 Now, turning' to the 1930 report, we find the total capital expenditure under the same headings amounts to £2,041,069. The difference between these figures is seen to be £296,940, not £447,683 as given. It is also fair to the Transport Board to point out that during the same three years, while all big businesses have found it exceedingly, difficult to hold their expenses in hand, the Transport Board, including interest on the increased capital expenditure, has brought down its total charges from £678,522 to £665.095, thus showing a reduction of £13,427. I fail to see why a deputation of Queen Street retailers should go out of its way to show the Transport Board up in as unfavourable a light as possible! All public transport undertakings, including our railways, have had serious difficulties to face, and that the Auckland Transport Board has succeeded so well is to its credit, rather than otherwise. Other Possibilities Explored. It should further be noted that the Transport Board has in hand a sinking fund of £493,055 invested outside of the undertaking altogether, which will be available to redeem the board's debentures as they fall due. The first debentures, amounting to £1,250,000, will be due in 1940, and, as Mr. Allum pointed out in his last report, this will relieve the undertaking of annual charges to no less an amount than £95,920. This in itself will be a very substantial annual profit. Moreover, the board will be relieved of the liability of £1,250,000, although still possessing practically all of the assets originally purchased with this loan money. During the past three years the board has written off also £30,175, thus completely wiping out the cost of. the 105 motor vehicles taken over under the Motor-Omnibus Act, 1926. This will not be a recurring charge. Reviewing the progress of the Transport Board during the past three years it would seem quite evident to any thoughtful business man, that it would not for a moment have considered spending money on an Albert Street outlet without first having thoroughly explored the possibilities of Hobson Street and Anzac Avenue. If the Transport Board maintains its management on the present efficient basis and expedites its service by the Albert Street outlet, it seems quite probable it will make travelling to the city so much more satisfactory that many people who now shop in the suburbs will prefer to do their business in the heart of Auckland, where they get a much better assortment. This will mean more business for all retailers in the area under discussion and more passengers for the Transport Board at the times during the day when they need the traffic most DECISION NOT MADE. STATEMENT BY MR. ALLUM. Replying yesterday to the criticism of | a deputation which waited oh the Chamber of Commerce concerning the Albert Street tramway proposal, the chairman of the Transport Board, Mr. J. A. C. Allum, said the board was faced with the urgent necessity of relieving the tram traffic in Queen Street and the demand of the public that the tram services should be speeded up. "We wish to give effect to these desirable improvements," said Mr. Allum. "At the same time it is also desirable to give the public the maximum travelling facilities. The committee of the board has these matters under consideration at the present time, and is taking into account the representations of the deputations which have waited upon the board, the many suggestions that have been made, and the various proposals submitted by the manager. "The board is faced with a difficult problem, but the public can be assured that whatever the decision may be it will be actuated by the desire to give the best possible service with the least possible inconvenience and harm to any section of the community. The board will not be influenced by propaganda, but will listen to any suggestions or any representations which may be made to it. It is to be regretted that statements of a misleading nature have been made, because this in no way helps the board in arriving at a solution of the problem." Mr. Allum said that when the board had reached its decision the proposals would have to be submitted first to the Local Government Loans Board and, should they be approved, to the ratepayers.