TRANSPORT ACT

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18530, 17 October 1934, Page 4

TRANSPORT ACT

RESTRICTIVE SECTION “KERNEL OF CO-ORDINA-TION" ASSOUJATED CIMM BER’S VIEW # Further reference to the interpretation of the Transport Act by district licensing authorities, in connection with the applications of newcomers to the transport industry for licenses to operate in competition with existing services, was made at yesterday afternoon’s meeting of the Gisborne Chamber of Commerce, when a letter received l from the New Zealand Associated Chambers recalled a previous discussion. At the. August meeting of the Gisborne chamber, Mr. L. T. Burnard first raised the question by declaring that district licensing authorities were given, by the Transport Act, the power to refuse any application for licenses to operate against existing services. He quoted the case of a young inan who had wished to enter the industry in.the No. 4 transport district, and whose application had been refused on-the. grounds that there-was a .sufficient number of services in existence.

After discussion' at that meeting, the matter was referred to the Associated Chambers' executive,, which body, in a letter received bv the Gisborne chamber yesterday, stated : “Your letter of August 23, in carnation with the Transport Licensing foot, was considered at the latest meeting of the executive, when it was decided, after discussion, that no action could be taken. The position is that, regarding the case you cite, of a particular individual, the executive is unable to take up individual eases; this applying not only to transport matters, but to others also. “TO DESTROY THE ACT” “We would point out that the clause in the Transport Act to which you refer is the kernel of the whole transport coordination legislation, as it is only by the power given the licensing authorities to refuse a license that the present scheme of co-ordinating transport could be carried out. To amend the Act so as to allow greater competition, as suggested by your chamber, would be to practically destroy the Act, in effect. “Of course, this does not mean that the executive is not sympathetic with the point of view put forward by your chamber. You will be aware that the executive opposed the Transport Licensing Bill from th'e time of its appearance, and subjected it to serious criticism in a series of publicity articles in 1931. The opposition to the method of transport co-ordination proposed by the Government- was unfortunately without effect, and the State has now embarked on a policy of refusing licenses to persons who were formerly, Minder open competition, free to operate. The particular case cited by your chamber is only one of many that naturally arise through the application of the restrictive legislation, and of which legislation the executive lias expressed its strong disapproval. WANGANUI’S EXAMPLE

“The executive suggests that your chamber might follow the example of at least one other chamber, namely Wanganui, and become active in connection with the applications that come ' before your district transport licensing authority. Tlife Wanganui chamber, we understand, appears before the district authority and gives evidence in connection with applications that come hefore that authority. We are sure the Wanganui chamber would he pleased to acquaint you with further information in this connection, were you to write.” When tho above letter was read at yesterday’s meeting of the Gisborne chamber, there was general agreement that an inquiry should be made as to the activities of the Wanganui body in connection with the license applications. Touching on a main feature of tho Associated Chambers executive’s letter, Mr. L. T. Burnard stated that the Gisborne chamber had not brought up an individual case except as an example of the manner in whieh the Act operated. Mr. Burnard added that the objection taken by the chamber was that the phraseology of the Transport Act appeared to be restrictive, and was so interpreted. The Act in effect applied to the transport business a restrictive principle which it would not bo possible to apply to other businesses, the effect being to prevent newcomers from entering the industry. Mr. Burnard then moved that the chamber inquire from the Wanganui chamber as to its intervention in cases before the district transport licensing authority. The motiw® received the unanimous support of Tie meeting.