ALBEIT STREET TRAMS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20598, 24 June 1930, Page 11

ALBEIT STREET TRAMS.

OPPOSITION TO PROPOSAL.

MR. LAIDLAW IN REPLY.

THE INTERESTS OF THE CITY. With reference to tlie Albert Street train proposal Mr. R. A. Laidlaw writc-s:— The West of Queen Street Business Men's Association is quite in accord with Mr. Kitchener about, further tram extensions. but Albert Street is not an extension in the sense in which that term is usually understood; it is a consoli'Jai ion furnishing the necessary terminal facilities for the extended system as it. now exists. That such facilities are necessary is so evident to every one of the thousands of people who have to travel, home by train from Queen Street in the evenings that it is really not open to argument.

Mr. Ford, who is in a far better position to judge than the Queen Street retailers or the West of Queen Street business men. has produced figures showing that the Albert Street lines will pay, but even if they did not show a substantial profit, but paid bare overhead expenses and maintenance, and at the same time resulted in saving considerable time for the travelling public, and made it easier for the officers in charge to control our transport system, these would, in themselves, be sound reasons for proceeding with the Albert Street lines. Mr, Kitchener says: "I and those who formed the deputation have one object in view, and that is to safeguard the wider interests of the community at large as against the interests of any one section." This certainly needs some explanation. The Queen Street retailers have been aware for years of the position of the transport system; now, if self-in-terest is not the principal reason for their present propaganda against Albert Street trams why have they so suddenly stepped forward to "safeguard the wider interests of the community at large!" The West of Queen Street Business Men's Association frankly admits that Albert Street tram 3 will be of benefit to their business interests, but contends that they will be of great benefit to the travelling public and the Transport Board as well. Why don't the Queen Street retailers who formed the deputation to the Chamber of Commerce openly admit that they fear tram 3 in Albert Street will detrimentally affect- their business interests, although experience in other cities faced with a similar situation has proved the results to be otherwise.

Bat apart from this why not be broadminded enough to see that one street cannot possibly carry the whole traffic for this city for ever, and that it is better to get rid of the congestion and hold the centre of the city as the principal retail shopping area rather than drive trade to the outer suburbs. In any case,, the matter will, no doubt, go before the public to vote on the loan, and if they are satisfied that the Albert Street trains will pay interest on the capital invested, provide work for the unemployed, and save themselves, say, five to seven minutes every night in getting home, they will no doubt vote for the loan irrespective of whether it affects Queen Street retailers or Lhs West of Queen Street Business Men's Association, and in the final analysis it is the public's interests that are involved. and it is the public who have the right to decide in a democratic country like New Zealand. DEPUTATION TO THE COUNCIL. TOWN-PLANNING ASPECT.

Mr. F. X. Andrews writes:—Although diffident about taking notice of anonymous correspondence, I cannot bift regret the tone of "CivicV letter in the Herald. I deprecate the feeling shown and the flagrant misrepresentations. The allegation of discourtesy to the Transport Board on the part of the deputation of which I was spokesman, is entirely unfounded. The position was simply this: That a deputation of city ratepayers, headed by Messrs. C. F. Bennett and L. A. Eady, waited on the City Council to request that it, should give every consideration to the town-planning aspect of the proposed Albert Street tramway and its effect on the traffic and congestion problems. ••Civic" evidently is not aware that the Transport Board is a transport authority only, with very wide powers certainly. But the Citv Council, as the chief local governing body, has a manifest duty to the ratepayers "to see that its powers under the Town-Planning Act are used wisely for the good of the whole community and not of any one section. Let me say again that no discourtesy to the Transport. Board was either intended or implied by the deputation.