OMNIBUS REGULATIONS.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXIII, 3 June 1926, Page 6

OMNIBUS REGULATIONS.

“UNDULY I-lARSH.” A LOCAL PROTEST. Strong exception to the recentlygazetted motor omnibus rogukitions was taken at a, special general meeting of the South Canterbury Chamber oi Commerce held last- evening, when the report of the sub-committee appointed was adopted, and a resolution was carried urging the Government to delay bringing tho regulations into operation until they have been considered fly Parliament. The president, Mr R. B. Bell, presided over a fair attendance.

Tile following report dealing with tho question 'was submitted by Mr P. B. Poo to', convener:—- '■ On May ID your Committee—Messrs B. L. Blodorn, AY. G. Irwin, H. Lowry, \V. T. Ritchie and tlio signer—was requested by the Gounod to examine the recently gazetted Motor Omnibus "Regulations and their possible application to Timnru in the light of.the present competition between tho municipal 'bus service and private ’bus owners, and ••also of the irregularity of the municipal .service prior to the introduction of the said competition.

With the exception of Mr Irwin (who recorded his dissent from the whole of tho following findings and recommendations), your Committee found that-tho municipal service as it existed up to, say, April 30 last, was unsatisfactory. Mechanical questions apart, it was considered that the traffic management of the municipal service was not what it should have been. For years past tho ’buses generally had been irregular and unreliable, and seemingly no great effort had been made to study the convenience of the public. Chapter and verse in support of this charge would seem superfluous, for the simple reason that within a few days alter the appearance of a quick and reliable private ' ’bu s , on Wai-iti Road and North Street tho municipal ferviee was brightened up so considerably that the spectacle oil the town's own ’buses running up to schedule time always, or nearly always, was generally commented on. Your Committee then turned to the future, and decided (Mr Irwm dissenting, as aforesaid) to recommend the Chamber to pass the following resolution ■

“That this general meeting of members of the South Canterbury Chamber of Commerce strongly protests against the recently gazetted motor omnibus regulations, made by Ordor-iii-Cbuncil, on the grounds that they are unduly harsh and are calculated to eliminate private enterprise to the detriment of tho public .welfare.” This decision fo'lowed the consideration of a carefully-prepared precis oi the regulations submitted by the secretary ; and the main grounds underlying tile decision may be set down as follows: " There are a number of provisions in the regulations which we recognise as necessary in the public in terest. The .matters, on the other hand, to wliuu wo object, and against which we desire to protest, are of vital importance as affecting the rights, needs, and ■ general in-, tereats of tile people. • We object to tho extreme powers given the local authorities under the regulations by which they may enforce conditions on _ their • business competitors which will be one-sided, liarsli, and unfair. This will, in our opinion, react against the interests of tho general public, and for that reason we enter our protest against such arbitrary rule in matters ot business. . Our strongest words of protest are raised against the unjust provision allowing local authorities to require payment from tile u-ers ot the plicate buses of excess fares over those which the municipal services charge and which the private bus companies wish to charge. This special tax on the public meets with pur full condemnation as being an invidious method or effecting a design which is not expressly stated. / Finally, we protest against the evident purpose which some of these regulations arc designed to effect of so burdening and harassing the private transport companies as to make -it impossible lor them to carry on. H is. in our opinion, to the Vest interest ot the public that both th<> mumcipa and private services should be, continued under fair conditions o, public and private enterprise. Only because wo consider some ol (lie regulations quite unfair is tins report issued. . _ i In moving the adoption of the ieport, Mr V. B. Foote said the method of interfering with business as a whoh bv Oider-ili-Ooum;iI, had been uuivcixa'llv deplored by Chambers of Commerce throughout the Dominion. ihe subcommittee also considered that the gnju<» of such extreme powers to die, loom bodies was also harsh and very untau. While the. regulations dealing will! iur ‘-urnnee were" admittedly, necessary it was felt that they had been enrr.ed too far, and that they coukl be cons.deiably cut down and still leave (he public very well protected. In seconding tho motion, i\lr ». l * Ritchie said it was a. question whether the Government was going to bolstei up inefficient services. As far as Limaru was concerned, too fact that one or two buses appearing on the streets, had "rcat’.v improved the service witnoud the expend.turn of nny loan money, was sufficient, proof that the serviceprevious!v had been rar irom clheiei. . When tlio new regulation came into force, said Sir Ritchie, it would be interesting to see whether the Council would retire hack to its old inefficient way, or maintain its present- ccmpulsoi'V standard. , , . Mr Irwin said that he intended to record his vote against the motion. The Timaru Borough had inaugurated the service and had had to educate the public into using the service. He considered that under the circumstances the Council had supplied a very fair service. Timaru was not a- large town, and in addition, various forms of locomotion were available to the residents. Tho time-table ivorked out at about eight trips an hour, and lie considered that that was quite satisfactory. At the present time it was difficult to obtain full loads, and many of the services which hail been established upon request, had also been found not to pay. There bad been some discussion regarding the suitability of the dnubiedeclted ’buses. In that respect ho would point out that owing to the necessitv of catering for peak loads at rush hours, it had been necessary to obtain another double-decker. Unless tlio public supported the Borough service. the loss would have to be met nut of the Borough rates. He therefor.' considered it was the Council’s dutv to prevent private owners from competing against the. Borough service. Mr Anstc.v stated that the attitude of the Borough Council in arbitrarily turning down all applications at the recent meeting, was absolutely wrong. Until the present the town had not had a ’lms service to (Tlon-iti, and theCouncil’s altitude had the, effect ot discontinuing a. service where one. lmd previously- not existed. Tho Council, said Mr Anstev. also insisted noon buying big. ironclad, double-docked juggernauts. whose sole aim in life seemed to lie in tearing up flip streets and shaking themsn'vns to pieces as uuieklv as possible. At the same time lie did not think that the private people should be allowed to come in and pick out tho e’-es of tlio service. The l " should maintain a tiirr'table and he thought it wa.s unite fail" that regulations should lv> drawn up to uronerly regulate the

traffic. What he did object to, however, was the arbitrary manner in which tho regulations were being enforced: by the local bodies.

Mr Leggott said that he thought that if the regulations were reasonably ad'mini.st erect there would be no objection to tho regulations on tho part of the private ’bus owners. He moved us an amendment that tho words “that the Government bo urged to delay bringing the regulations into operation until they have been considered by Parliament,” be added. Tho chairman said that it was painfully evident that efficient service had not been provided by the Borough Council, and he was certain that it was on that point that tho service had been condemned. Tlio Council had obviously not attempted to study the requirements of tho public as it should, that being borne out by the fact that as soon n,s a Sunday service had been established, the public had largely patronised it. He considered that the Borough Council had acted in a very arbitrary manner, and although they had made what they considered was a final decision, he thought personally that strong disapproval would he expressed all over New Zealand, and that strong efforts would he made to have matters remedied. He suggested that the protest be forwarded to tile Prime Minister, find that copies he forwarded to the Hon. F. J. Rollcston. and Messrs T. 1). Burnett, AI.P., and J. Kitchener, M.P. Air Porter said that, as a ratepayer, he would associate himself with the remarks passed by Mr Irwin. Ho did not think that it was altogether right to permit tho private owners to take over the trade, or that they, as ratepayers, should endeavour to assist"the private owners against the public service. Mr Leggott’s amendment, regarding the addition to the motion, was carried. and the resolution was then adopted, Messrs W. G. Irwin, E. Porter and AY. J. Hogg dissenting. It wa.s also resolved that tho resolution be forwarded to the Prime Minister, and that copies bo forwarded to the Hon. F J. Rollcston and Messrs J. Bitchener, M.P., and T. D. Burnett, M.P.