FLAT-RATE FARE

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 791, 11 October 1929, Page 16

FLAT-RATE FARE

LOCAL BODIES APPROVE OF SYSTEM ARGUMENT OVER VOTING Confusion and much argument marked the closing stages of a three-hour discussion at a conference last evening of delegates from local bodies in the Auckland Transport Board's district, when the principle of the flat-rate tram fare was affirmed. The board was requested to obtain statutory authority to bring it into effect, if necessary by a poll of ratepayers. A LTHOUGH a keen debate had been carried on throughout, it was not until the close of the meeting, when it was a matter of deciding who was entitled to vote, that any confusion took place. There were many differences of opinion whether delegates had any authority to vote on behalf of their respective local bodies. In opening the meeting, Mr. E. H. Potter, Mayor of Mount Eden, said that the two main questions to be faced were the Transport Board’s estimates of traffic receipts which, for the current year, indicate a loss of £22,000, and the fact that motor-car and taxi competition was increasing. “It would not be a matter of regret if the extreme ends of the tram routes should develop rapidly under tile fiat-rate system,” said Mr. Potter. Extensions beyond those now in hand were not necessary, and the trams would return more under the flat-rate than th.e high fares. The tramways in general would be favoured with more business, and such areas as Remuera, Avondale and Point Chevalier would benefit with the outer suburbs, while the effect upon Auckland as a whole would’ he likely to cause the spread of population and an increase in building activity. USED IN AMERICA According to Mr. F. S. Morton, a member of the Transport Board, the flat-rate was used throughout America and Canada, while many other countries had also adopted the system. One could travel anywhere in New York, even to Philadelphia, at a cost of five cents or 2Jd. Many had said that the flat-rate was satisfactory where there was a large population, but in answer to this one had only to go to Honolulu, where one could travel for more than 10 miles on a flat-rate fare. “And no one can say that it has not been a success,” said Mr. Morton. “My reason for advocating the flat-rate fare is that the Auckland transport system under public ownership lias never paid its way from revenue alone, and there are accumulated losses of more than £80,000.” Continuing, Mr. Morton said that it was time the ratepayers had something to say in the matter. If the flat-rate were introduced it would be possible to carry adults at 3d and children at lid. “It was unfortunate that the manager of the board should report as he had done. It was a deliberate attempt to nullify the activities of those endeavouring to get the new fare. The job is too big for the mail. When the matter was discussed at a previous meeting Mr. Ford did not venture any definite opinion, but certainly gave the impression that he was agreeable,” said Mr. Morton. In a review of traffic revenue, the speaker said that the flat-rate would have raised the figure for 1927-28 from £700,263 to £798,661, an increase of £96,398. In 1928-29 the change would have produced an increase of £59,781, and for the first 145 days of the current year it would have brought in £22,671 more. Mr. R. T. Michaels (Newmarket) said that one and two-section fares could not be increased to any extent without a heavy loss of traffic. He failed to see how the trams could possibly carry people for nine miles for 3d, and make it pay.

PENALISING SHORT RIDERS “It would cause a loss in total revenue and my council considers that the scheme would unduly penalise the short-ride traveller,” said Mr. S. Donaldson (Newmarket). Mr. G. W. Hutchison (Auckland City) said that the change would provide the board with £83,000 more revenue. The bulk of the total increase would be borne by City residents, aud it was his council’s duty to protect them. The figures before the local bodies did not go far enough to enable anyone to draw up a new fare. There was no need to tinker with tramway fares, seeing that the system was making a profit. In reply to Mr. Hutchison, Mr. Potter said that a concession fare of 2Jd might be instituted under the flat rate. This would meet many of the objections. Mr. Clark (One Tree Hill) moved that the conference affirm the principle of the flat-rate fare and request the Transport Board to apply for an Order-ip-Council, authorising the change and providing for a poll of the ratepayers if one were required. When the chairman was about to call for a vote, Mr. J. M. Melville protested on the grounds that the Mount Eden representatives had no directions from their council. Mr. W. PI. Nagle, in supporting Mr. Melville, said that a general invitation seemed to have been issued and no one knew who was entitled to vote.

Mr. Potter; I will take a vote from two delegates of each body. Mr. Nagle’; That is most unfair. Mr. Potter: Well, it can be reported to the council later and then the council can vote upon it. The motion was declared carried on voices. But this did not satisfy someone, who asked for a show of hands. This started another argument and Mr. Potter said that he would accept votes from all those present. Mr. Hutchison: Your decision is absurd. A noisy argument followed, but a show of hands was eventually taken and the motion was carried by 19 rotes to C.