The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. “Luceo Non Uro.” THURSDAY, MAY 21, 1936. Another State Monopoly?

Southland Times, Issue 22895, 21 May 1936, Page 4

The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. “Luceo Non Uro.” THURSDAY, MAY 21, 1936. Another State Monopoly?

The charge made by Mr Coates against the Transport Amendment Bill, that it aims at the socialization of transport in order to bolster up the railways at the expense of private enterprise, the Government will find hard to answer. It may be admitted that the last Government’s transport legislation was not successful; and further that the new Bill in many of its provisions, notably those proposing a reduction in the number of licensing authorities, makes some workmanlike and useful reforms. The fact remains that the control of one of the country’s vital services has been left open to the gravest abuses. The effect of the Bill in conjunction with the Railways Amendment Act is to place all transport under the Minister of Railways and the Minister of Transport. Except with the written consent of the Minister of Railways no licence can be granted for any road passenger service having substantially the same route and terminal points as a passenger service for which the Minister himself holds a licence. There is apparently no appeal against his refusal to give consent; and against the decision of a district licensing authority the only appeal is to the Minister of Transport himself who is to work “in close co-operation with the Minister of Railways.” Mr Coates has drawn the only possible conclusion from these facts, which is that the Government is aiming at a State transport monopoly in which there will be little or no room for the private operator. The Government, it is true, has said that private operators will have fair treatment; but that is the only assurance they have against the effects of legislation which is clearly intended to make road transport subservient to the railways. It was not so long ago that the Minister of Transport, Mr Semple, when he announced that the Government was determined to complete the NapierGisborne railway, said it was equally determined that the inhabitants of districts served by the railway would not be allowed to use other forms of public transport. Private operators who feel that a general assurance of fair treatment is sufficient protection for the future will not find much comfort in this statement nor in the recent purchases by the Minister of Railways of road services competing with the railways.