TRANSPORT LAWS

Evening Post, Volume CXIV, Issue 119, 16 November 1932, Page 11

TRANSPORT LAWS

NEW GOODS PROPOSALS

ORDER-IN-COUNCIL OPPOSED

"MATTER FOR PARLIA-

MENT"

. The opinion that tho proposed new goods transport regulations should . lie given effect to by legislation instead of by Order-in-Council was expressed in a resolution passed by the Wellington Chamber of Commerce last night.'CANTERBURY VIEWS. A letter from Canterbury, read by the chairman, contained the following resolutions, which were discussed at Christehurch last night:— ..,■'. "That this meeting, representative of •the farming, manufacturing, and commercial interests of Canterbury, protests against the proposed Order-in-Council to provide for the regulation of' goods services, on the grounds:— (1). That,the proposals are so farreaching that they should be submitted to Parliament for consideration, in the form of a Bill instead of becoming law by Order-in-Council. (2) That, the provisions moved involve an extension of harassing and unnecessary.interference by the Government with 'the (business of transport, and incidentally with all business. (3) That the regulations will increase the cost and decrease the efficiency of transport, and will further cripple trade and business at a time when its freedom to expand is vital. (4) That the regulations are considered to be" largely designed to protect the railways against competition from road transport, and there should be no grounds for any' suggestion that the government would cripple private enterprise in support of a Government service. There should be no limitation to the benefits from private transport enterprise because of antecedent commitments by the Government. If some of the railways capital is lost, and the functions of tho railway do not cover the. requirements of modern transport, this should be -no reason for denying the business of the community tho benefits of up-to-date competitive transportation. This meeting recommends to the Government that a committee appointed by and .representative of road transport and other commercial interests bo invited to confer with the Minister of Transport in order to redraft, the proposed regulations to ensure reasonable regulation of the- Dominion's goods transport along sound and workablo lines, and. that tho operation of the regulations, be .postponed until the recommendations, of the suggested advisory committee" have been considered by Parliament in an entirely now BUI of a suitable character.'' OEDEES-IN-COUNCIL. ;...'.'-I:: am .in. favour, of these resolutions, said "the chairman,: Mr. J. P. ■ Luke, _ '■' particularly in respect to the necessity .for any regulation's, or any method to be adopted for the regulation for the transport system. The conditions to be sot up should be dealt with by Parliament' and not by/Order-in-Council, a procedure which has grown to such tremendous proportions that we do not know where we aTe. Orders-ln-Council are pushing us all further into the mire. The I matter should be dealt with after consideration by. the raihvays, road transport, and coastwise shipping. You cannot separate them. These systems are all of vital' importance to the Dominion as a whole, and any attempt to :deal with one of ihem by Order-inCduricil is inimical to the wholo of the Dominion." -He moved that the Chamber support the Canterbury, resolutions.' ' . ; ' ; ■ '

Mr. D. Eodie, commercial manager of the Eailways Department, seconded the motion, though in his opinion the resolutions showed a want of knowledge of the Transport Licensing Act. ■ It had been saia that the Act was to protect the railways. In fact, the -. Act was designed to cut put wasteful overlapping of the transport services'of the country in.,.the interests of national economy. Epad and sea transport had welcomed.the Act ana joined with the railways /in pressing for~ its application. Pirating was causing: the conntry to spend millions unnecessarily.

•' INDISCRIMINATE TRANS- ;-:■• : ■'•;: PORT.. '•..: ,■. ■ ■

. Mr. Curtis said lie could not support the resolutions as a whole, though ho,agreed that the matter should be brought before Parliament to safeguard it.he- transport, interests. .They were being taxed to-day to the extent' of some' £5,000,000 in benzine, heavy ;traf • fie fees", etc., for the upkeep of roads. If the roads wererto be subject to the indiscriminate running of motor transport they would find that instead of the transport charges coming down, they, would; be increased. In a very little while they - would -. be taxed another £5,000,000 to put the roads in order again. Some of the. clauses in the re•solutions were very objectionable to people in the transport industry^ BegulationsVto control the industry were essential. < The railways were competing in every class of business to-day, and some of the.. unwarranted, road competition would not be 'able to carry its share of the extra taxation.

Mr. Barton.Ginger.welcomed the resolutions as putting the business on a controllable 'basis.- The trouble was not in the cities alone, but over the whole country. His disagreed with the Order-: in-Council procedure.

AN EASY ALTERNATIVE?

Mr. M. G. ,0: MeGaul: Why are. Orders-in-Council necessary? Is it not because Parliament does not function? The ordinary man on wages is supposed to start at 9 a.m., but Parliamentarians leave it all to the end of the session, ana then rush, a few Bills thrqugh. . ■ -.; ■ >

Eegulations were necessary, said Mr. C. J..-B. Norwood, and very wide powers would.be necessary to make them effective. It must not be merely a question of making the railways pay. Who was going to administer the regulations —a-public department or a board? If he were satisfied with the constitution of the board which would deal with it, he would give it wide powers. The Christehurch Chamber was apparently suspicious of something political. Mr. Seed asked if the interests of the users of the goods or those of the transport industry were being considered. Where would the general public come in? Users and business men should be represented on the body.

HIGH TRANSPORT CHARGES They must realise, said Mr. Luke, that high transport charges were their greatest obstacle. New Zealand was a country 1000 miles long, but narrow. Coastwise transport must bo taken into consideration. If they were to deal with the transport question, let it be done comprehensively. The business of the country, through Orders-in-Council, was being dealt with more and more by departments and less ■■ by Parliament. "The whole "matter revolves round the railway department," he said. "The board running the railways has a most difficult task. It is, I believe, trying to do its duty, but that does not alter the fact that the board is saddled with antecedent matters that wore incurred in the early days. What we aro trying to do is ta Tun a concern so iieavily over-capitalised that it cannot get its rates down to basis. * However much wo sidestep the issue, we all know that the backbone of the internal transport system is the railways, ana, whether we like to admit it or not, I