THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES FRIDAY, MAY 23, 1926. MOTOR-BUS REGULATIONS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19801, 28 May 1926, Page 8

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES FRIDAY, MAY 23, 1926. MOTOR-BUS REGULATIONS.

It cannot be suggested that the reception accorded to the motor-bus regulations has been generally flattering. So far as the opposed interests represented in the bus proprietors and the tramways respectively are concerned, opinion has naturally tended to swing from the extreme of condemnation to that of approval. The middle view expressive of the opinion of those who have no direct concern with the operation of either trams or buses, but are interested in the provision of adequate services for the conveyance of the people, may have inclined towards a more or less dubious regard of the regulations based on uncertainty as to whether, in its desire to protect the tramways, the Government has really studied sufficiently the broader interests of the public. If it could be demonstrated that the tramway systems provide services that are entirely adequate for the conveyance of the public in the cities in which they operate, a good deal of the ground on which criticism of the steps that are being taken to protect them has been based would disappear. That, however, can scarcely be demonstrated. And since there is room for the operation of private bus services in the interests of the public, and without competition with the tramways, the public naturally does not wish to see anything done that would discourage the institution of such services. That it is desirable that the tramways should have reasonable protection against competition cannot be seriously disputed, though it would be unfortunate were that protection to operate against the pursuance of a progressive policy upon the part of those responsible for their control. There can be no real question of the necessity for the regulation of motor bus traffic. Regulations of the type of those' now introduced are needed ; the only point at issue is as to whether those framed by the Government in some respects go too far to the detriment of private enterprise. The lengthy statement on the position, issued by the representatives of the principal tramway systems of the Dominion, constitutes, as might have been expected, a defence of the regulations. None the less it contains much sound and incontrovertible argument. It is satisfactory to find the tramway representatives affirming that “obviously it is in the public interest that the tramway systems should not only continue to exist, but also that they should be maintained at their maximum efficiency.” Possibly their reference to the manner in which the tramways have encouraged settlement of the population in suburban areas will riot carry a great deal of conviction to the residents of certain communities. The opposition to the motor-bus regulations has centred largely against the provisions relating to fares, insurance, and the licensing authority. With regard to the stipulation that, in the case of pri-vately-owned motor buses running on the same route as a tram, the fare must exceed by twopence that charged on the tram for the same journey, it is contended that “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.” On the other hand, as the regulations run, a motor bus service is to be licensed over a given route only if the existing transport facilities arc not sufficient to meet the needs of the public, and it may bo asked whether this safeguard would not in itself be adequate to achieve the main results aimed at. It has been objected that the licensing authority—in the ca.se of Dunedin, the City Council—is necessarily the party particularly interested in the elimination of all competition, and that even the provision whereby, in the event of an existing bus service owner being refused a license, he shall be paid compensation, need not cause the licensing authority any actual inconvenience, in that the license might he granted by it with the knowledge that the fares which the bus proprietor would have to ask of his passengers would soon bring about his elimination. Regulations on the subject of insurance as applied to motor bus proprietors are clearly necessary. Were there no provision for insurance the travelling public might be deprived of the means of redress in the event of an accident for which the bus proprietor would be liable. The objection is raised that the provision for insurance creates a greater liability than is necessary. The public must be safeguarded and the regulations provide the safeguard, but there is a feeling, which has not been removed by any definite data respecting the rates involved, that they make provision for a measure of insurance greater than the risks in the case necessarily warrant. The insurance requirements might usefully bo subjected to careful consideration. A general point to bo borne in mind is that the opposition which the motor-bus regulations have excited is itself a sequel to a pre-existing state of warfare betwixt tramway and motor-bus services.

THE EXHIBITION ART GALLERY. A munificent offer which was communicated to the City Council yesterday by the Mayor—the offer by a publicspirited citizen and his wife to purchase the Exhibition Art Gallery and present it to the city for use as a public gallery —should contribute materially to the harmonising of the divergent interests that have been concerned in the controversy over the utilisation of Logan Park. If the sports bodies and the University authorities will only regard the whole matter in the broad and liberal spirit which has prompted this exceedingly generous offer, there will be a cessation of bickering to the end that Logan Park may become for all future years a centre of recreational effort at once comprehensive and attractive. It is a mistake, as Dr Hercus pointed out yesterday, to suppose that recreation consists merely of muscular exercises. To suppose that it does is to give to the expression a meaning that is restricted and not strictly legitimate. There is a recreation of the mind as well as a recreation of the body. An art gallery provides for the former just as sports grounds provide for the latter. The existence on the Exhibition site of a well-designed, well-lighted art gallery affords a unique opportunity for the possession by the city of premises that would provide suitable housing for the excellent collection of pictures which has now been acquired for Dunedin. If that opportunity is lost through undue insistence upon narrow claims it will be for ever regretted. It has been said that it would be an act of vandalism to convert the Exhibition Art Gallery into dressing rooms. It would, in any case, be a costly business to convert them to such a purpose, and when the business was completed, it is to be apprehended that the result would be unsatisfactory. It would be not less expensive, and in all probability the result would be equally unsatisfactory, to attempt to convert the gallery into a grand stand. But for the particular purpose of housing an art collection the gallery has been proved to be eminently satisfactory. Sir Lindo Ferguson said with a great deal of force yesterday that there is no certainty that, if another gallery were erected to the same design as the Exhibition Gallery, the result would be as fortunate. It would be a wise act on the part of the community to preserve ,the building that now exists for the object for which it was erected. On the part of those who, fortified by pledges given at a time when it was impossible to envisage the scope and the character of the Exhibition undertaking, have been advancing claims irreconcilable with this consummation, it would be a sportsmanlike act to withdraw their claims in the general interest of the public good.