The Waikato Times THURSDAY, MAY 21, 1936. MODERN TRANSPORT

Waikato Times, Volume 119, Issue 19891, 21 May 1936, Page 8

The Waikato Times THURSDAY, MAY 21, 1936. MODERN TRANSPORT

The historical review of transport development in the Dominion,given by the Hon, R. Semplo when he outlined the IWTOVISIOHS 0f the Transport Amendment Bill, really served to. stress the need fer i-onlinuul :uljihtiuMits to meet changing conditmns. In thls measul'v, £l\ in most ul,’ the Bills brought down by the Government, thel [H‘m'uss ol' centralisation of power is most marked, hula the rea test will he the extent. to which these powers are exercised.‘ 'lhe development of motor traffic has been remarkable, .illld 1t .Wlll .be the (lnfv of the Minister. and his Officers, to co-ordmute this With lho other brain-lips of the transport system. The danger is that llH'l‘L' lllflV he an effort to shelter one form of transport at the expense vl' :.noilier whereas progress can be assured only by allowing the in: l (illiciunt and economical to reap the advantages that eflimency uml (muomy merit. ‘ _ _ “ n

There is an impression, not by any means confined to New. Zeaiand. that lho day of the railway is passing, but this View is not l‘k'lkl by experts in matters of transport. They are more confident than ever that the railways, if modern inventions and busrness methods are adopted, will prove formidable competitors, especmlly for any long hauls and for heavy freight. The oil—electric engine has passed beyond the experimental stage. It .5 used in countrles as far apart as Siberia and the Argentine and it cuts costs down to n matter of a few pence per mile. An engine of this class reduced the transcontinental record in Canada by more than eighteen hours. Here is a possibility that the authorities should consider carefully, for such a saving in costs would place the railways in a very strong rompetitive position. There is no suggestion that there should be a mniplete change-over, but the expenditure on an oil-electric engine, us an experiment, would be justified and the data obtained might prove invaluable.

There are other ways of effecting improvement in the economic handling of freight, doing away with much of the delay caused in the loading and unloading of railway trucks, and the alternative to the adoption of these modern methods is not to place additional lmndiuups on competing forms of transport. That policy could result only in stagnation. After all the problem has been faced again and again. The nonstruetion of railway lines destroyed other forms of transport then regarded as of great importance. Motor transport has invaded the field and already, in the matter of passenger traffic, faves a growing competitor in fast air services. These things are inevitable in a progressive community, and they must not be deliberately handicapped in the interests of the older forms. There would have been no growth at all unless these services had in some way met a public noegl. There may be, and probably is, good reason for eo—ortlinnting the various branches of the national transport system, but not to the extent of bolstering up the less at the expense of the more efficient. The problem facing the less efficient is to raise the standard in that respect, and those in close touch with modern transport problems appear to be the most confident that own modern methods are applied to railways they will be able, and quite econoniivally, to compete survessfully with all rivals.