AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

PETITIONING AGAINST A MUNICIPAL BILL.

28th February 1928
Page 65
Page 66
Page 65, 28th February 1928 — PETITIONING AGAINST A MUNICIPAL BILL.
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Strong Opposition to Certain of the Bus Provisions in the Bradford Corporation Bill.

pETITIONS against the Bradford Corporation Bill, which deals principally with motorbus and tramway matters, have been presented by a number of motorbus concerns. In one petition the Bradford Chamber of Trade, the Bradford Commercial 'Vehicle Users' Association and the Bradford Horse and Motor Vehicle Owpers' Association have joined. In another action is taken by the Hebble Bus Services (Messrs. 0. and G. Ltoldsworth), of Halifax ; the Hedna Bus Services, of Greengates; the West Yorkshire Road Car Co., Ltd., of Harrogate ; Blythe and Berwick, Ltd., of Bradford ; Ideal Bus Services, of Beckmondwike; Calder Bus Services, of Brighouse ; High Brigg, of Wilsden ; and S. Ledward, of Leeds. In addition, a petition has been presented by the Yorkshire (Woollen nistrict) Tramways Co., Ltd. The motorbus owners object to the powers which would enable the mutiiciPal authorities to duplicate tramway and motorbus services on any route upon which they at present operate tramways or trolley-buses, pointing out that this would enable the Bradford Corporation, without any consent from any Local authority into the .areas of which it runs services, to duplicate services by bus and tram or by bus and trolley-bus. They would also be able to put on express buses as and when desired, and to suspend these services as they desired at any time of the day. The owners are prepared to accept the clause provided it relates to the substitution of services, and not the duplication of them.

Further opposition is raised to the section which seeks to enable the corporation to enter into agreements with other corporations or private companies to run to any place outside the city. They oppose this section generally, but hold that if such powers had to be given there should be some reference to an outside authority as to whether a service was necessary or not, and that there should be an area-restriction proviso, or otherwise the corporation could run long-distance services. They further point out that it has been the policy of the Bradford Corporation to oppose the institution of motorbus services by refusing to grant licences, and when challenged has, it is alleged, contended, before the Ministry of Trauspo I, that such seivices are unnecessary.

The Bradford Chamber of Trade, the Bradford Commercial Vehicle Owners' Association and the Bradford Horse and Vehicle Owners' Association oppose the Bill as ratepayers in the city. On such ground they oppose the purchase of the Bailiff Bridge tramways undertaking from the Halifax Corporation, object to the expending of further money on buses and to the provision of increased facilities to run buses on existing tram tracks outside the city, as well as the extension of bus services outside the city, as is proposed in regard to arrangements with other corporations and private companies.

Mr. Fred Pickering, secretary of the Bradford Chamber of Trade, is organizing secretary of the movement in opposition to the Bill, and Messrs. W. G. Burr, Sugden and Co., of Bradford and Keighley, the solicitors acting in the matter, have briefed leading counsel.


comments powered by Disqus