Breezy Bus Debate

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 909, 28 February 1930, Page 8

Breezy Bus Debate

TRANSPORT TO TAMAKI St. Heliers Folk Dubious FEEDER bus services were well-named, because people soon got fed up with them, remarked Mr. F. t . Jordan at a lively meeting of St. Heliers Bay residents last evening called by the Tamaki Residents’ and Ratepayers’ Association to discuss transport over the waterfront road.

The speaker was arguing against control of the service by the Auckland Transport Board. He felt that a bus run over the new road could not be made satisfactory to residents of the high lands without a feeder service. He would not like to mention what people were saying about feeder buses in other parts of the City. Thinking to profit from experience at the Koliimarama meeting on Tuesday, the chairman, Mr. JL Glover-Clark, proposed that speeches be limited to seven minutes, a motion which per* ished at birth. As at Kohimarama, a series of amendments, one or two of which lapsed for want of seconders, were put up. Discussion was opened by Mr. J. Trenaire, who moved, and it was seconded, that the Transport Board be asked to provide a service, and in the event of its refusal, that private tenders be called. He spoke earnestly and was commended by the opposition. He asked why private enterprise should be given the cream of Auckland bus services, when the whole transport area should _ benefit. He hoped the Transport Board would show its good sense by deciding to operate the run. Mr. R. E. Fawcett moved the amendment that the meeting affirm the principle of private enterprise operating on the Waterfront Road, unless an immediate guarantee of efficient, cheap, and permanent service was obtained from the Transport Board. Perceiving that this proposal was the exact motion at the Tuesday meeting, a ratepayer challenged its admissability, inasmuch as Mr. Glover-Clark had then disallowed what was last evening’s motion. “You are reducing this to an absolute farce,” a burly resident told the chairman. “You rule one way here, and another at Kohi. We are all among smoke.” Muttering something about going home, a veteran got up and w r ent. “We are going to be the laughing-

stock of St. Heliers if you conduct the meeting as you are now doing,” shouted a disgusted voice. Some argument about procedure followed when a motion of no-confidence in the chair was proposed. Not to be done out of a night’s entertainment, the people, however, upheld the chair. Mr. Fawcett then proceeded with his amendment, speaking on the lines of his Kohimarama plea. A new note was introduced by Mr. J. H. Hubber, a member of the City Council when Tamaki was incorporated in the city. He asked whether the district got a fair deal when the council took over. Voices: Yes. Mr. Hubber (triumphantly): Then the same people are on the Transport Board as were sitting in council when you joined the city. He counselled the meeting to throw itself unconditionally on the Transport Board—(ironical laughter) —because it had money, and therefore could buy good buses. “You people committed suicide when you cast away the boats for a private bus service,” he said, and added: “You must have been mad.” Chorus (good-humouredly): You are! Another speaker caused laughter by claiming that the motion and amendment were so closely related, like people in the hack of the Prayer Book, that no parson would marry them. He incurred Mr. Giover-Clark’s displeasure by repeatedly making direct personal reference to a former speaker. The chairman ruled such remarks should only be made via him! After more speeches, in which the Transport Board was “keel-hauled” and' defended, the meeting passed Mr. Fawcett’s amendment by about 80 to 50. Mr. C. J. Lovegrove and Mr. R. Glover-Clark, together with Mr. R. E. Fawcett and S. C. Jordan, who were appointed at the Kohimarama meeting, were elected a deputation to place the views of the meeting before the Transport Board.