“Promises Broken”

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 172, 11 October 1927, Page 8

“Promises Broken”

CITY’S BUS POLICY Honour Before Profit, Says Mr. Porter ISAY definitely that a promise was made. There was not the slightest indication that the City Council would not carry on a transport service as good as, if not better than; that in existence at the time.’ Writing to The Sun from Wellington. Mr. \ . 11. Potter, M.P. for Koskill, upholds his contention that, by reducing bus services, the Auckland City Council has failed to keep faith with the people.

‘TyjAY I ask,” writes Mr. Potter,

‘‘how Mr. J. A. C. Allum obtained his knowledge, and when, seeing he was away from New Zealand when the question of motor-bus regulations was being considered by the Select Committee of the House in Wellington? I attended nearly every meeting, as one of. the committee appointed to hear the evidence, and cross-questioned the witnesses, especially Mr. T. Bloodworth, the City Council’s principal representative, and I say definitely a promise was made, and I am not alone in making that statement.

“Furthermore, Mr. E. P. Lee, who was the chairman of the Select Committee, devoted much time to crossquestioning Mr. T. Bloodworth and others, so as to ascertain and feel sure that the general public would re-

ceive an equally efficient transport service at the same fares. This can be proved by the questions and answers which appear in the evidence, which was taken down at the time. Mr. E. P. Lee, on reporting the majority finding, ‘V. H. Potter alone entering his strongest protest,’ makes Hpecial reference to this side of the issue, and dispels all doubt from the mind of any unbiased person as to what the Auckland City Council’s representative led the members of the committee to believe. Neither Mr. Thompson, who was chairman of the Auckland Tramways Committee, nor Mr. St. J. Clark, acting manager of the tramways, who were also present, contradicted Mr. Bloodworth’s statements. Inadequate Service “The City Council’s bus and tramways policy of to-day, and the intentions of the Tramway Committcse as regards the future, may be all that Mr. J. A. C. Allum has stated: but it is of little consolation or satisfaction to the general public, who have to pay the increased fares with s.n inadequate service. The City Council of Auckland urged upon the Government the necessity for motor-bus regulations, and a Select Committee of the House was appointed to hear all evidence, and report its finding to the House. Mr. T. Bloodworth, Mr. Thompson, Mr. Clark, were appointed to represent the Auckland City Council. Mr. Bloodworth was the principal speaker and clearly stated ths.t the City Council could and would maintain an efficient service without increased fares. “So eager was the City Council to have a monopoly that it failed to real-

ise what position it would And itself in in the event of the bus companies compelling it to pure has 3 their various undertakings. Let Mr. J. A. C. Allum place before the public the financial position of the tramways for the last four years, and prove that the alleged profit a year was not an actual loss. If after providing for sinking fund, depreciatinn and full maintenance a profit can be shown, why the necessity for borrowing a further £IOO,OOO, to be expended, on the various tram tracks. Mount Eden Road. Dominion Road, etc.? “Surely it is obvious to any thinking person that the £IOO,OOO was borrowed and expended on the tram tracks, because the City Council ha l for years neglected to maintain them fully or to place to a maintenance account any profit which had accrued. Now if the alleged profit is deducted from the £IOO.OOO, which has been expended, it will show a decided loss, plus the interest the tramway company will have to pay on "he £ 100,000. “THE SUN’S article states: ‘By its creation of “he Motor Omnibus Act the City Council gave the bus companies the welcomed opportunity to "get out from under.’ ” Well, the bus companies get out from under and tbe City Council has ‘got under and can’t get out.’ That is the position. Tbe whole fact of the matter is that tbe capital cost of the tramways undertaking is out of all projiorUon to i s earning capacity, coupled with i:s heavy overhead charges, viz., a host of inspectors and officials, etc., whose numbers would not be tolerated by any private business concern for one week. As regards the City Council’s bus service, which it ran in coiupetion to its own tram service and opposing bus companies, it has been clearly demonstrated that the capital cost, combined with the size, weight and petrol consumption a mile, left what could only be expected—a seifious deficit. Without the Option “Mr. J. A. C. Allum states that no services have been withdrawn until the residents in the district concerned have been warned of the position, and told that increased fares, or a subsidy, would be necessary if the service was to be maintained. What difference, may I ask, does a warning make to a person who has no option? If Mr. J. A. C. Allum was on a ship In mid-ocean, with his bands tied behind his backj and the captain warned him the ship was going to sink, would it be of any satisfaction or assistance to him? “In my opinion the motor-bus legislation was one of the most unjust regulations ever passed In New Zealand, and tends to make private investors extremely shy, while it places upon the working man an exira burden, in fires, which is equal to an increased re ntal. It was brought into being by tbe Auckland City Council because it has from tie beginning been quite incompetent to manage the transport. It has made enormous losses, and has failed to cater for the general public in the outside areas, thus compelling private enterprise to fulfil the neglected duty. “Now, the City Council has got more than it anticipated. It has the monopoly, it is the proud possessor of the largest fleet of buses in New ZeaJaud, it has an ever-increasing: loss account, a dissatisfied public, anil a knowledge that the outer areas have been deprived. of its means of transport, sadly inconvenienced and compelled to payincreased fares. And till because of legislation which was made on the understanding that the City Council would play the game and maintain an adequate transport service without increased fares. "The time has arriv ed when Ihe people of cuter Auckland should ask the Government either to compel the Auckland City Council to honour its undertakings, or to repeal the MotorBus Act.”