“NOT. TO BLAME”

New Zealand Times, Volume LIII, Issue 12528, 18 August 1926, Page 12

“NOT. TO BLAME”

’BUSES AND EASTBOURNE PROPRIETOR GOES BEFORE COMMITTEE FERRIES CRITICISED The Eastbourne ’bus service did nGt come under the ’bus regulations, contended G. Bosher, of Eastbourne, before the Parliamentary Committee on ’bus regulations yesterday. “The Mayor erf Eastbourne, in giving evidence before the Select Committee last week, so far forgot himself as to call our service a ‘pirate’ service,” said Mr Bosher. “That statement is very funny because his council is still paying us the subsidy for connecting our local sorvice with all steamers at Eastbourne, thus employing thG ‘pirates’ for the council’s convenience. I fail to understand why the Mayor of Eastbourne—a borough r.ot possessing or running any motor’bus service—should be called on for evidence in a tram v. ’bus controversy. Waterborne traffic is a matter quite apart . .We agree to systematise traffic, but certainly do object to any licensing body being concerned in the running of any vehicular traffic . . . The Mayor of Eastbourne lias stated that the ’buses were ‘pirating’ on the ferry service. We give that statement, an emphatic denial.” The witness strongly objected to the insurance proposals in the regulations. FROM OTHER PLACES “Wellington is seven miles from Eastbourne by water and sixteen miles by road. We are not running in competition with the Wellington Tramways nor the New Zealand Railways, and possibly in that respect our service is unique. And we are not running in competition with the Eastbourne Council’s steamer service, as that service only supplies the wants of the residents of Day’s Bay and Rona Bay, whereas we convey the bulk of our passengers from Mabena Bay, York Bay, Lowry Bay, Howard’s Point, Gracefield Estate, and Petonc East near the racecourse. Since we commenced our service many people have settled in these bays, which they cJould not otherwise have done because there were no cheap means of transit. We know that our service 5s satisfactory and desired by many residents of the eastern bays. FERRY MANAGEMENT Mr Bosher made a severe attack on the*management of the ferry service. “Should the council find it necessary to dispose of the steamer service,” he asked, “how are the residents to journey to Wellington if the ’bus service is discontinued owing to harsh and unreasonable regulations? The residents are vitally concerned, as in a sense they collectively own the steamers, and if they patronise our ’buses because of better service they do so with their eyes wide open. “It may not be out of place to ask you to ascertain the age and condition of at least two of the Eastbourne steamers, and why the other one bought at an exorbitant cost is not run during the major portion of the year. Furthermore, ir has been admitted to you that the Eastbourne Borough Council parted with £5600 worth of debentures for nothing. “From the above facts it will* bo admitted that the council’s inefficiency and bungling methods are the cause of their present position, which cannot be attributed to the ’bus service.”