OUR RAILWAYS

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 11251, 1 July 1922, Page 11

OUR RAILWAYS

ADMINISTRATION DEFENDED “TWO SCHOOLS OF RAILWAY ECONOMISTS.” SHOULD RATES BE INCREASED ? (Contributed.) In all countries railway transport charges differ a* widely as between commodities. For example, champagne has to contribute a great deal more per ten to railway revenue than coal, and. motor spirit much more, bulk Tor bulk, than soap. In New Zealand local coal pays loms than imported coal; in fact, our scale of railway charges bristles with concessions, and shows that assistance to local production must be an ever-pre-sent consideration with the Administration. He who runs may read, and if people who occasionally comment adversely on the railways management would apply some of their regard for tho land they live in to comparisons of transport charges here, with those of other countries, they would be compelled to recognise that they have much to be thankful for.

It is certain that our charges could be substantially increased without- any danger of harmful opposition. That motor vehicles occasionally carry motor spirit is conceded, but, obviously, they could be easily put out of business, as, indeed, they may be, on a revised scale of charges being adopted, of which there lias been some mention by Government.

PASSENGER RATES.

Management of the North-Eastern Bailway in England has been extolled as conspicuously satisfactory, and. that being so. the following comparison of half-yearly ‘passenger ticket rates for a distance of ten miles should be of infcereni to season ticket-holders on the New Zealand railways:—

Ist Class. 3rd Class

£ s. d. £ 6.1 d. North-Eastern ... 6 8 0 4 o 6 New Zealand ... 517 0 *4 10 0 ( # 2nd class)

(Note. —These are pre-war figures.)

Kates for other distance's, and for other periods varying from one month to twelve months, show corresponding differences. Another comparison, having a local, application, may be quoted as calculated to make season ticketholders residing, for example, eight miles from their business towns (Lower Hutt is eight miles from- Wellington) recognise that they have advantages to be envied; that is to say, Hutt residents may travel first-class in comparatively luxurious cars, with generous seating accommodation, at a cost of less than sevenpence a day, whereas dwellers at Island Kay, who use the tram 3, and who are carried about half the distance, with only standing room for most of the way, pay nearly eigntpence a day. The holder of a secondclass railway ticket, who can travel m vastly more comfort than is possible by tramway, at most time*;, certain}} always when business. people in numbers are proceeding from and to their homes, may do so at a cost of less than fivepence halfpenny a day, for an eight-mile distance, or about twice the tramway distance for a little more than half its cost.

A further advantage enjoyed by the railway season ticket-holder is that he may travel on his ticket by every available train on every day of the week, and, whatever number of journeys he may make after the first two, he can regard them as made free of cost, whereas the tramway traveller pays every time he hoards a car. IF THEY ARE TO PAY? If the time should arrive when the Government of the daj A may he goaded into deciding that the railways are to be run in accordance with business principles, a consummation /some people affect to desire, such will necessitate abolition, of free services and the stiffening of present charges generally, to an extent which may make the malcontents “sit up’* and think hard, in the course of which they may recall the proverb about tbe wisdom of allowing sleeping dogs to lie. From first to last, embracing a period of many years, the criticism dii rected against the railways management has never been very pungent, and certainly not at any time destructive. A section of the community asks that the lines be made to pay (these are probably the non-rcficctive people) but a much larger section, apparently, is a good deal more concerned about having sen-ices performed cheaply, without exhibiting any anxiety about .the cost of them. These are, perhaps, the selfish people, knowing ‘as they do, no doubt, that the Consolidated Fund is behind the railways. In other words, there are two schools of railway economists, one holding that the prime consideration in working a State system should be cheap services, and that if the revenue falls short of tho expendituz-o the difference should be drawn from Customs duties. The other contends that the railway tub should stand on it« bottom, and that users should directly pay at least full cost of the advantages they enjoy.