TRANSPORT COUNCIL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26848, 12 August 1948, Page 5

TRANSPORT COUNCIL

PEDESTRIANS’ INTERESTS CASE FOR REPRESENTATION P.A WELLINGTON, Aug. 11. The streets of Wellington were more dangerous than those of London, New York or Paris, contended Dr A. M. Finlay (Govt., North Shore) when the debate on the Transport Law Amendment Bill resumed in the House of Representatives to-night. He said he would like to see pedestrians represented on the Transport Co-ordination Council. A case might be made out for establishing a rule of absolute liability to protect pedestrians involved in accidents with motor vehicles. When pedestrians were hit by a car liability was usually disputed and there was often contributory negligence on the part of the pedestrian, but it could be argued that the cost of accidents should be a charge on those who owned and uesd cars. If absolute liability were established, pedestrians injured by motor vehicles could be assured of compensation without having to prove a motorist’s negligence. Dr Finlay said the Co-ordination Council was purely an advisory body with no executive power and there were no grounds for the fury and despair with which the Opposition had greeted the Bill. The Bill was a minor but useful one which should make for a better transport system in the Dominion.

Mr S. W. Smith (Oppn., Hobson) said the Bill was by no. means a minor one. The Opposition had become used to the introduction in the ■ House of “ minor ” Bills having major effects. Complete Socialisation

Mr Smith considered the Bill was a preparatory one for a complete socialisation of transport, which would come later. He regretted that there was no provision in the Bill for security of tenure, and suggested that the licensing term might be extended. He could not see why Government, farmers’, and local body vehicles should be exempted from obtaining certificates of fitness. Mr R. M. Macfarlane (Govt., Christchurch Central) said that farmers and the community as a whole owed a great deal to the railways, and the country would not have been developed to the extent that it had were it not for the railways. Opposition members, rather than defend or assist the railways, used every opportunity to. criticise, the system, forgetting the great debt that was owed to that particular transport system. The Opposition was, however, always more interested in private enterprise.

He said the Opposition had read into the Bill an attempt to socialise the transport of the country, but that was simply a repetition of an old cry. He would remind the Opposition that in 1926 to late Mr Coates had sponsored a Bill enabling local bodies to take over the existing transport services, and the reason for the Bill was to protect local body services from outside competition. Drunken Drivers He considered that in cases where drunken drivers repeated the offence they should be disqualified from holding a licence for life, and the law under which a person realising he was incapable of driving a car and simply sat in the back seat could be arrested should be reviewed. There should also be a review of the. right-hand rule, which, he said, was not thoroughly understood by many motorists. Mr R. G. Gerard (Oppn., Ashburton) said he believed a reasonable-sized transport co-ordination council was necessary. He would like to see a greater security of tenure for transport operators. Many of the present difficulties of the transport industry arose from the operation of the 40hour five-day week. He believed the powers contained in the Bill were the ones required to carry out the wishes of the Federation of Labour, which had advocated that all sea, air and land services should be nationalised. Mr Ritchie Macdonald (Govt., Ponsonby) said, one-third of the Dominion’s road transport was operated by ex-servicemen. The. Rehabilitation Department was not likely to advance money to returned men for transport businesses and to train them at the public expense if the Government intended to nationalise the services they were operating. He thought the railways could run economically and profitably. Mr J. T. Watts (Oppn., St. Albans) said there were greater difficulties facing New Zealand’s railways to-day than ever before. As far as the taxi services were concerned, one of the main problems was that cabs were wearing out and not being replaced by new ones. The transport industry already represented a fair measure of Socialism. Transport legislation was in a mess and required considerable revision and consolidation. He had the gravest objection to the constitution and powers of the co-ordination council. It would be the means of controlling the whole industry by Government officials and trade union nominees.