LOADING PLATFORM.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 5076, 17 January 1927, Page 2

LOADING PLATFORM.

CHARGES BY THE RAILWAY. REGARDED as UNFAIR. A regulation <>f the. Railway Department which imposes an annual charge of £25 upon a local body using a loading platform for loading metal into the railway trucks at a local tody platform was adversely criticised by members Of the Thames; County Council at their meeting last Thursday. The council recently received an offer for metal from a neighbouring county and approached the department in reference to loading facilities at the Matatoki station, near their quarry, and were informed of the regulation. In reporting an offer of 10s per cubic yard on the truck at Matatoki station, the engineer (Mr Higgins) stated that the price offered was fairly satisfactory, provided suitable facilities could be arranged for loading t,he metal into the railway trucks. With a vie.w to undertaking a commercial enterprise, it was decided to enter into negotiations with the department for a loading platform at the station. In order to expedite matters the county clerk visited Auckland, and placed the matter fully the department, with the result that the engineer has since inspected the site and agreed to the

council constructing a loading platform. The officer representing, the department could not agree to assist t,he council in the. construction of the platform, and stated that there would be an annual charge o'f £25 for the rights in connection with the same. In the meantime, carting and loading of metal is carried out under contract at the rate of is 9d per cubic yard. When the report was read the chairman (Cr. H. Lowe) said tjiat an annual charge of £25 was most unfair. They had been told that the Railway Department was. doing everything possible to encourage people to send goods by rail, hut a charge of this sort, was not encouraging trade. It looked as if the council would have to pay £25 a year for the privilege dl doing business with the railways. Considering that the council would have to bear the cost of the platform, he thought the department should assist the council and erect the platform or remit the charge. Councillors generally expressed the opinion that the. annual charge was unreasonable, and that 'representatjons should be made to the department to have it remitted. The matter closed by the council deciding to take this line of action.