NEW TRANSPORT LICENCES

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24911, 26 June 1946, Page 6

NEW TRANSPORT LICENCES

EVIDENCE BEFORE AUTHORITIES DEFENCE BY FORMER OFFICIAL - ”1 want to assure tits public that licensing authorities generally make much inquiry prior to sittings of the particular authority and do not depend upon the often ill-prepared submissions put before them,” said Mr T H. Langford, the former No. 3 port Authority, yesterday. “The remarks of Sir Francis Frazer at a public hearing of an appeal by Mid-Canter-bury Transport, Ltd., against Burnetts Motors concerning the ease with which applications for licences were dealt with may create public uneasiness if not replied to," AS he was no longer a licensing authority, he thought it was proper that he should reply, said Mr Langford, instead of the responsibility of a reply being cast on authorities who were still in office.

An authority should know everything about the district under his control. and if he does not know that many !;.‘?. orrect decisions will result ” he said His work is not only judicial He is making a study of the transport and transport facilities, licensed and other This means continuous study of all relevant facts about industry, production. and distribution.” In the particular case dealt with on Monday, he had given a decision in favour of the respondent company in !941, which was reversed on appeal, said Mr Langford, In 1045, the application was renewed, and his knowledge of the district enabled him to gjve a decision w'-thout a repetition of the 194 T evidence. As a result of the public hearing of the appeal by the same appellant op Monday. Sir Francis Frazer reversed his previous finding and upheld the authority’s decision, “I do not think Sir Francis Frazer intended to give the public the idea that licensing authorities treated applications tod lightly, but it must have been created," concluded Mr Langford,