MOTOR-BUS COMPETITION.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19800, 27 May 1926, Page 10

MOTOR-BUS COMPETITION.

MENACE TO TRAMWAYS RECENT PROTECTIVE REGULATIONS. ENDORSED BY TRAMWAYS CONFERENCE. (Pds Ukited Phess Association.)

WELLINGTON, May 26. ' To-day representatives from the principal tramway systems in New Zealand met m Wellington and discussed matters relating to the licensing of buses and the working of a uniform method of granting these. The following statement was the outcome of their deliberations:— 1. Down to the present date no system of passenger transportation has been discovered which can compare with electric tramcars for reliability, treedom from accident, cheapness and genera! efficiency, this is the carefully considered opinion of experts in passenger transportation, not only in New Zealand, but also in England and the United States of America. The tramways Committee of the city of Manchester reported, inter alia: A motor bus cannot be considered cither as a practical substitute for a tramca.- for the passenger transportation of the city and ditrict, or for a central area only. The Highways Committee 01 the London County Council endorsed the foregoing, and there is abundance of American opinion to the same effect. 2. The electric tramway systems already is existence in New Zealand have cost the community approximately £6,090,000. 5. Tramway installations are authorised bv Orders-in-Counc.l. issued under the Tramways Act, 1803, which strictly regulate all matters relating to public safety and convenience, and, in addition, require the tramway authorities to maintain approximately one-third of the roads over whicn they travel They also in many instances contribute substantially towards the local rates.

4. Obviously it is in the public Intel est that the tramway systems should not only continue to exist, but also that they should be maintained at their maximum efficiency. 5. Wih the advent of unrestricted motor omnibus competition the tramway systems are threatened with serious financial loss. Consequently, there can be no funds for efficiently maintaining the systems unless rates be levied for the purpose. 6. The motor omnibus regulations are expressly designed to prevent such loss and to enable the tramway systems to [unction efficiently. 7. Motor omnibus proprietor and their supporters admit that the regulation of passenger traffic is necessary. 8. Except in matters of levin only fne regulations to which strong objection has been taken are: (1) regulation which relates to the appointment of the licensing authority, and (2) regulation 10, which requires omnibus proprietors in certain cases to charge a fare greater by 2d than the tram fare chargeable for the same journey. 9. With respect to appointment of a licensing authority, (a) it is obvious that some body must be clothed with this duty and that some principle must be laid down for the guidance of that body in carding out its duties. It may be pointed out that a local authority has all Uie requisite machinery and organisation 'or the puipoe (b) No provision is made is to the most of administering the regulaia >k. (c) _ lbn local authority is bound to act piuicially. (d) There is the right of appeal to me Transport Appeal Board from its decisions, and the Appeal Board is •ep’asentative of all the interests, including the interests of the motor omnibus proprietor;-. 10. With respect to licensing, the position of the tramway authorities is; If licenses are granted, and to the extent to which they are granted, the tramways must face the competition of motor omnibuses, whilst if licenses are refused the tramway authorities must pay just compensatiom reas ' on that unrestricted competition between tramears and motor omnibuses is economically unsound it is essential, if a tramway system is to be efficiently maintained, that no licenses should be efficiently maintained, that no licenses should be granted where the existing facilities are sufficient, and that, where such facilities are insufficient, licenses should be granted only to such a number of omnibuses as will provide sufficient facilities. As a general rule, motor omnibuses can be used economically, only as supplemental to tramway services. , , , , 12. With regard to the 2d extra fare: (a) This is the only satisfactory .method which has been evolved whereby unnecessary and wasteful duplication of services can be prevented, road space can be conserved for regular traffic, and pirating and other undesirable practices discouraged. (b) The system works well in England where similar conditions have arisen. (c) No substantial hardship is involved, as ail the districts not served by tramways are still open to motor omnibus traffic. 13. The community has established a prior right to traffic on the routes of its own tramears. Their services have been in existence for some years, and are efficient, permanent, reliable, and cheap. They are owned and controlled by the community; the profits, if any, belong to the community, and the losses are a community burden. 14. The tramways have encouraged the settlement of population in the suburban areas —in many cases at a loss —by establishing a system of transportation of a permanent kinu. 15. Where maintenance is adequately provided for in tramway and in motor omnibus undertakings, the tramcar is in a position to convey passengers at about 50 per cent, less cost than the omnibus. 16. The tramway systems are large consumers of electric current, the sum paid by tramways throughout the Dominion for current being approximately £250,000 per annum. This large consumption is an important factor in cheapening the supply* of electricity to the public for general purposes. 17. Motor omnibuses depend for their power upon petrol, which must be imported from outside the Dominion, and the price of petrol is determined by the industrial, political, and economic conditions of other countries. 18. It would be manifestly unsound from a business point of view to permit our useful tramways to become inefficient by reason of the competition of a system which cannot possibly provide an equal advantage. AN AUCKLAND RESOLUTION. iPer Exited Press Association.) AUCKLAND, May 26. At a conference between representatives of the local bodies and Labour members of Parliament, in reference to the motor bus regulations, Mr Harris urged a postponement until Parliament had met. The meeting resolved unanimously, after the members of Parliament had retired: "That this meeting of local bodies’ representatives requests the Government to suspend the coming into operation of the motor bus regulations till September 30, in order to avoid hardship, and that the whole question be reviewed by Parliament.”