RAIL v. ROAD.

Taranaki Daily News, 13 May 1922, Page 12

RAIL v. ROAD.

REFORM OF RAILWAY METHODS, REPORT OF CANTERBURY INVESTIGATION. At a meeting of the Canterbury Progress League held last week, a long and valuable report on transportation in Canterbury was presented by the organiser, Mr. P. R. Climie. The following are his recommendations: 1. New lines should not be extended into new territory until such times as traffic was sufficiently developed by means of the motor truck to fully justify profitable operation by me railroad. 2. Good motor roads should, therefore, precede railways in opening up new country. 3. Railway plans for the future should be based on the potentialities of the motor vehicle, which had fully demonstrated its ability to haul light loads over short distances in competition with the railroad when speea and efficiency are the deciding factors. 4. The shortest or cheapest route for new' lines are not necessarily the most profitable. Hence it followed that equal consideration should be given potential sources of revenue, operating costs, and maintenance as well as capital expenditure. The views of the Railway and Agricultural Departments should therefore be taken into consideration when new lines are being plan-

Rates should be reconsidered in the light of existing and prospective road competition so as to capture trade that could be more profitably transported by rail which at present goes by road.

6. A reduction in rates and overhead charges should be made. To continue indefinitely in face of vanishing returns with present staff and inflated charges was to invite disaster. To reduce rates without corresponding reduction in operating charges would involve the department in further losses. 7. Regulations should be more elastic and regarded as a guide only. The policy should tend towards decentralised control in the direction of granting district managers more discretionary powers to attend to local questions. That would obviate delay and preventcongestion in head office.

8. Stat ion masters’ duties should be extenued beyond their present restricted sphere. They should become district business “chasers” for the department. Their energies in that direction would very soon reflect creditably upon their traffic returns.

9. A careful scrutiny of the department’s existing methods should be conducted to see where small improvements could be made, waste obviated and economies effected. It was in the aggregate of these small matters where appreciable results are obtained. 10. The department should undertake both the collection and delivery of all rail-borne goods, either by means of its own fleet of motor trucks or under an extension of the one-time contract system.

11. Road and rail services should be co-ordinated as far as possible so as to obviate unnecessary overlapping which is wasteful.

12. Motor transport services, acting as “feeders” to the main lines of railways, should be established by the Railway Department in lieu of -hort ■branch lines, which were expensive and cannot compete with the motor vehicle for short hauls and light loads. 13. The Hiley scheme at Lyttelton and Christchurch was an urgent requirement, long overdue, and the works should be put in hand without further delay. 14. There should be a permanent local committee of business men to which railway difficulties might be referred to from time to time.