TRANSPORT APPEALS

Taranaki Daily News, 13 October 1934, Page 6

TRANSPORT APPEALS

PROTEST FROM NELSON PERSONNEL OF THE TRIBUNAL MINISTER ANNOUNCES CHANGE. EXCEPTION IN CERTAIN CASES. By Telegraph—Press Association. Nelson, Last Night. The Minister of Transport has replied to the protest of the Nelson City Council against those provisions of the Transport Act which allowed the same members to hear applications and appeals. The Minister stated that New Zealand was one of the few countries where the right of appeal was granted from decisions of transport licensing authorities. It had become apparent under the 1931 Act that the procedure could be exceedingly costly, and the 1933 amendment was not designed to deprive (nor did it deprive) any interested party of a reasonable hearing. It did, however, make possible by the elimination of unnecessary and complete re-hearings a measure of financial relief to all concerned.

Under the earlier legislation the tribunal was an appeal board pure and simple. The amending legislation established the board, the primary function of which was to co-ordinate the various forms of transport, the method of exercising that function in respect to road transport being by means of the power vested In the board to determine appeals lodged from the decisions of the transport licensing authorities.

In the particular case which the council was concerned exception was taken to two members of the board as they constituted the personnel which as the central licensing authority made the decision appealed against. Although it was extremely important that the Transport Co-ordination Board should have final jurisdiction in transport matters, in view of the fact that the board had a large amount of investigational work for the Government in hand, that only a small number of cases was involved in the decision, and that a similar position could not arise again, the Minister said he was prepared, having already consulted the board, to exercise the powers conferred on him and arrange for those cases not already heard, and which wculd come within the category complained of, to be heard by a different personnel from that which constituted the old central licensing authority. “I can assure you,” continued the Minister, “this decision does not in any way imply that the Government has any reason to doubt the impartiality of the members of the board, but in view of the attitude adopted by those interested it has been decided to remove' any suggestion of injustice of the departure from what is the usual procedure, despite the fact that it has been ruled by the Supreme Court that the board can legally hear such cases.” Councillor Moynagh said the protest had received almost unanimous approval throughout the Dominion. . The council decided that the Minister’s reply was generally unsatisfactory. While noting with satisfaction that arrangements had been made for a different tribunal to hear the impending appeals the council requested the Minister to inform the council what action he intended to take regarding repealing the section in dispute in response to the representations of the New Zealand Law Society, the Canterbury and Wellington Chambers of Commerce and the almost unanimous opinion of the local bodies of the Dominion.