ST. KILDA TRAMS AGAIN

Evening Star, Issue 23683, 17 September 1940, Page 11

ST. KILDA TRAMS AGAIN

TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT REPLIES GR GIBSON UNDER FIRE HD ACTION UNTIL END OF SEPTEMBER Replies to long-awaited letters written by the St. Kilda Borough Council to tbe Transport Committee in regard to an improved tram service to the borougli were discussed at last night’s meeting of the council, general dissatisfaction with their tone being expressed. Criticism was also made of Cr H. L. Gibson, chairman of the committee, for issuing independent statements to the Press, particular reference being made to tho remarks ieleased by Cr Gibson immediately following the last meeting of the St. Kilda Council at which there was sharp comment concerning the slighting manner with which replies to the council’s correspondence were treated. Cr Cdbson had spoken of the council’s attitude as a “pin-pricking” one, but it was stated last night that it was the Transport Committee who bad adopted the policy of “ pin-pricking.” The first letter (dated August 30) was from the town clerk (Mr R. A. Johnston), who replied to the council s letter of August 21 requesting a reply to the representations made by tbe deputation which waited on the Transport Committee in regard to the Forhnry Park (Richardson street) and St.'Kilda services. These representations, said the letter, had been placed before the City Council’s Transport Committee, and it continued: A perusal of the records of the meeting shows that the decision of the meeting was to the effect that the whole matter stand over for further consideration when tho results of the half-year’s trading to September 30 would be available. This was tho decision communicated to your representatives at the meeting, "and in the circumstances a reply was considered unnecessary. “ I am requested by the committee to assure you that your council’s representations in this matter will receive full consideration as soon as the trading are known, as indicated above.” A second letter, under date of September 7, was signed by Mr W. H. Mackenzie, manager of the transport department, and read: “ With reference to a request made by Or Rutherford at the conclusion of the conference held at the Town Hall between your council and the Transport Committee that the Forbury Park cars should run some distance beyond the present terminus, I have tp say that this matter has received a good deal or consideration by the chairman of the committee and myself, but we regret being unable to accede to the request.. Consideration was given either to running as far as Council street in Moreau street, or to pole 2 in Plunket street, hut it was found that, while on certain trips this could be done, in the majority of cases there was not sufficient time to run these distances. Further, in the event of turning into Moreau' street it would he necessary for fully 80 per cent, of the passengers to alight from trams before reaching Moreau street and thus shorten their journey. It is considered undesirable to have some trams turning into either Moreau or Plunket streets and others stopping at the present terminus; and therefore it is felt that in the meantime no alterations should be made to the existing arrangement.”

There was yet another letter from Mr Mackenzie, and although it had no bearing on the other two, it was considered at the same time. This letter referred to the council’s request that steps be taken to remove water which, after heavy rain, lay about the tram tracks in Moreau street. The council suggested that the tram rails he raised. Mr reply stated that the question of raising the rails had been Considered arid it had been found that the tram line had not sunk below the original level, which was shown in comparison with the manhole covers. The trouble appeared to be that the shoulder of the road was too high, particularly at the intersection of Council street, which was above the level of Moreau street; this, together with the shoulder, prevented the water flowing into the* channel. The transport engineer was prepared to discuss the matter, but it could not be agreed to have the like lifted ’as requested. ACCUSATION OF PINPRICKING. “ Mr Mackenzie's letter is as disappointing to this council as it will be to the ratepayers,” said Cr W. J. Lovell. All other time-tables in the city wore tin a 15-minuto schedule, and the council had asked that the Moreau street service be restored to a-10-minute or a 15-minuto basis. “ AVe are accused of pinpricking because wo asked for that which other lines have got,” ho continued. “ This is not pinpricking. The position is most unsatisfactory, and it is now up to the resident's and this council to take iqi the matter in another way. “ It would bo interesting to know,” remarked Cr Lovell “ whether this letter is the committee’s or Mr Mackenzie’s personal opinion. I happen to know that the chairman of the Transport Committee and Mr Mackenzie discussed the matter, and I consider it should have been decided by the committee. It seems; that those two men decide the policy of the Transport Committee; We shall have to decide what action shall be taken, and in the meantime I do not think we can do anything other than receive these letters.” Cr Lovell moved accordingly. Seconding the motion, Cr E. Longworth said there was nothing else that could bo done in the meantime. There was one thing to be grateful for at least, and that was that the resolution passed at the last meeting demanding a reply to the council’s correspondence had borne fruit. * Three letters had been received, although one of them did not concern the tram service. CR GIBSON CRITICISED. Cr Longworth expressed indignation at the way in which the chairman of the Transport Committee “got up in arms ” whenever the St. Kilda Council criticised the Transport Committee. The council had the right to make comment on that committee. Yet when anything was said the chairman adopted a childish attitude and rushed to the reporters airing his grievances to them. Cr Longworth maintained that if Cr Gibson had any grievance to express which concerned the council he should bring it to the council. Concerning the services to the borough, Cr Longworth said: “When the City Council approached us 12 months ago for permission to run buses on the Richardson street line I said then, and I say now, we should have given that a trial. It was my opinion the City Council would retaliate by cutting down the tram services, and wo have undergone a policy of 1 pinpricking ? ever since. (“ Hear, hear.”) Through the cutting out of a whole block in Richardson street many residents have been cut off a reasonable service.”-

Tho St. Kilda Council appreciated the transport department’s financial position, and accordingly had asked for reasonable improvements. One of these had been for a more even running of the service. As it was two trams, one to Richardson street and one to St. Kilda, followed one another. This could and should have been obviated, but nothing had been done, and residents were forced to cool their heels for 15 minutes or so waiting for the next two trams.

“ Wo are in an unfortunate position,” Cr Longworth concluded, “ and we can’t dictate. Wo can only fight for a fair thing, and we are prepared to fight for a fair thing.” The mayor (Mr J. J. Marlow) pointed out that in fairness to tho transport department the letter from the town clerk had been received tho day after tho last meeting of the St. Kilda Council, and had not come as a result of the resolution passed at that meeting. It had been posted on August 30, which was before tbe meeting. “ When we write to the town clerk, should we not expect to get a reply from him and not from tho transport manager?” asked Cr H. H. Johnson. The Mayor considered that Mr Mackenzie was acting within his rights to reply. “We are now close to September "30,” he said, “and i suggest wo wait until the half-yearly trading figures are available, and then ask for a conference with tho committee. We can do no good passing resolutions here. A round table conference would bring much better results.” Cr N. D. Anderson said that the opinion of the ratepayers and the residents was that the council was getting nowhere. “ They maintain that the chairman of tho Transport Committee is pulling the wool over the eyes of all of us in this district,” he declared, and added his objection to the remarks made to the Press by Cr Gibson following the last meeting of the St. Kilda*Council. The deputation had been promised that tbe Richardson street service would he looked into immediately, and that was at least 13 weeks ago. Cr Gibson inferred that was not tho case.

Cr J. H, Hinton considered that if the council had promised to wait until the end of September before going further into the matter of services it was only honourable and reasonable to do so. The whole question could be fully discussed and considered then. “ We were promised an early reply in regard to Richardson street,” said Cr Anderson, “ and it is absurd to think it takes 13 weeks to reconsider that service.” The two letters pertaining to the tram running ■were received. Regarding the third letter, the Mayor remarked that a blue print accompanying it showed that thc_ council had been wrong in its contention that the tram lines caused the water to he, and he moved that the borough engineer be instructed therefore to take steps to carry the water away. This was approved.