CONTROLLED TRANSPORT

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 55, Issue 3929, 21 July 1937, Page 7

CONTROLLED TRANSPORT

POSITION OF ROAD OPERATORS. I APPEAL TO WAIPA COUNTY COUNCIL. The following letter to the Waipa County Council, from Mr F. Parsons, was read at Monday's meeting: You are no doubt aware that the Government proposes to acquire my service as being competitive with the railways, under threat of refusal of nfy license to operate, and having been entrusted with your transport work for some years past I feel it my duty to acquaint you of the position. (1) The Government intends to create a railway transport monopoly under complete legislative protection. Privately owned transport on routes com petitive with railways is to be controlled; it is therefore apparent that you may neither hire nor put on your own transport tn future. Provision already exists in transport legislation for this ristriction and with this purpose. (2) The present list of services for acquisition involving all services operating from the four main centres is only a start towards complete control. ot transport and elimination of private enterprise which has, as you will agree, vastly improved transport service. (3) The continued operation of my service when taken over by the Railway Department is very doubtful. Briefly, the views of transport operators throughout New Zealand as expressed through our organisation, the New Zealand Road Transport Alliance, are: That transport will lose in efficiency and service under a Government monopoly; that there will be lesser facilities and slower deliveries; that the door-to-door and personal service hitherto provided by private enterprise will disappear; that even if no all round Increase is made in rail freights to meet the existing railways’ deficit, the extra handling and extra packing necessitated for railing must increase transport costs. I feel that the best interests of the public, and particularly of my clients have not been considered, and it is the purpose of myself and all those others affected to use every possible means to endeavour to have the Government reconsider this policy. To this end your co-operation and support is confidently anticipated. Will you, therefore, make known your views as a user by: Having the matter considered and strongly opposed by your organisations (Chambers of Commerce, Manufacturers’ Associations, Farmers’ Unions, etc.); conveying your personal objection to your Members of .Parliament; and advising me for transmission to the Road Transport Alliance. Cr Onion remarked that it seemed the only redress was to obtain a change of Government. The engineer said he, at times, got goods by the road service, as more convenient than the railways. Cr Hall mentioned the transport of cheese from Hairini factory to the Auckland freezing works. The advantage of road transport was between 10s and 15s per ton as compared with railway charges. Cr Garland said the railways are State controlled, and they must either be maintained or jettisoned. Cr Graham said he was an advocate of the railways. Cr Garland thought if if the railways were not operating the road operators’ charges would be appreciably higher. Cr Church said the road operators were paying for the roads. Cr Clarke: Oh, no; if they were paying their full share we would not have to strike and collect rates for road maintenance. It was stated that Parsons operates a very convenient service for Te Awamutu and district. Cr Livingstone forecasted a steady drive by the Government to eliminate the road operators. The chairman said he understood the Government intended to take over the road services and in some cases operate them. In other cases the road services would be closed down. The chairman remarking that it was perhaps unwise for the County Council to interfere, the Council merely received the communication.

Mr Parsons’ circular letter was also read at the Borough Council meeting on Monday evening. The Mayor was of opinion that for inland towns road transport was of vital importance. He recalled the old days when railway transport was very much below requirements and it was only when it had to compete with load transport that improvement was provided. Years ago the Department refused to make Te Awamutu a stopping place for the Main Trunk expresses until it was threatened with opposition by a road service. Cr Rainey agreed, and added that freights would be raised by the railways if road services were eliminated. Mr Parsons had built up a splendid reliable service that was valuable to all traders in the country centres. The Mayor said that he very strongly objected to the Government attitude of offering to take over the road services .at an arbitrary price, and if the transporter refused it would decline to issue him a renewal of the license. That was a confiscation, not compensation, and by no means British justice. In the old days there was water service to Pirongia, and was patronised in preference to the “rotten” rail service. Cr Gifford voiced similar views and mentioned the time when the Railnays Department refused to carry explosives—with resultant delay and inconvenience to users in the country. Cr Maxwell said he was strongly in favour of the existing road services being maintained. The Mayor, reporting on the proposshould be remembered. There the people had competitive freight rates, rail versus boat, and contended that if Te Awamutu lost its road transport, rail freights would promptly go up much higher and the service would deteriorate. It was decided to support Mr Parsons’ protest.