LEAVES FROM THE INSPECTOR'S NOTEBOOK.
Page 9
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Why Should the L.G.O.Co. Raise Its Fares? "Things We Want to Know "About Agrimotors.
IT MAY JUST be my bad taste, or it may be that ray visits to the theatre are so occasional that I have to pick and choose rather more carefully than is usual, but I have to confess that I am one of the few who has not seen the Gaiety play "Going Up." I do not even know what it is about, but, passing the famous theatre times out of number during the past twelve months, it frequently struck me that the title of the play now running there is, probably, as appropriate as any in London to-day. Everything is going up," and we are seemingly by no means at the end of it. I have just read of the latest fare revisions on the part of the London General Omnibus Co., and I presume that these advances are to be justified, as in all the many similar cases, by the claim of increased expense S due to labour and material rises: Most of us have little enough sympathy far the majority of these opportunist demands on the public, but, in this particular instance, surely there are special factors which call for some ,consideration.
. When the Underground Railway financial interests began to discover, some years back, that the motorbus was not only no longer a, negligible factor in the great struggle for the passenger traffic of the metropolis but growing a very formidable competitor, they promptly did the bold thing and set to work to acquire the controlling interest in the London General Omnibas Co., with the result that the earnings of the buses were made available to counteract, in suitable measure, the not altogether pleasing results of the running of, at least, some of the tube concerns. Those of my friends who are most learned in matters of high finance tell me that it is a by no means easy matter for those who are not in the know to follow exactly how far the successful operation of motorbuses in London contributes to the dividends payable on tube shares. Of that I know but little, but I speak with some knowledge in saying that the London buses themselves can be made to pay, and pay handsomely,
on their old fares.
If that be so, and there is little reason to doubt it, there is no excuse for the premier company's present advance to the public. The travelling London public has every right to the most economical form of travelling that competition can provide. The motorbus, by itself, in metropolitan conditions can take care of that, and no considerations of profit sharing with Underground interests should be permitted to deprive the public of the full benefit of motorbus operations. It has to be remembered that, by astute business handling, the Underground Railway group has created and secured for itself a practical monopoly of public services—a monopoly for which it pays no, more than the petrol tax on the usual licences. Were there still competition ; if competing interests, with one or two exceptions, had not been forced off the road ; !the public would automatically 'secure the benefit of strictly competitive prices. But, in the present monopolistic state of affairs, nothing of the sort is possible.
The price of the monopoly created and enjoyed by . the Underground interests should be strict limitation of fares. Much more than the interests of the ordinary travelling public is involved. The motorbus services of London have set the pace for this class of traffic all over the world, and it is particularly desirable that this type of machine should be operated in the most economical manner. at the present time, when all kinds of transport are to be reviewed on competi. tive lines. If the Underground authorities can show that the London motorbus services per se cannot be maintained at the present fares, then they have a right to put forward a claim for revision, but, if the cause for revision is merely an attempt further to squeeze the bus-using public, in order to bolster up other portions of London's traffic trust, it is most undesirable that it should be allowed—particularly in the absence of effective competition.
Such action is a challenge to the new Ministry of Ways and Communications to nationalize London's pasAenger transport facilities. After all, the L.G.O.Co. have secured their monopoly, notby any State grant, but by keen competitive business ; they should not be allowed to. exploit it now that competitors have disappeared, to the detriment of the users—and, indeed, to the detriment of the industry indirectly.
"Things We Want to Know"---About Agrimotors.
The recent announcement of the dual appointments of technical expert and organizer for the agricultural tractor trials of next autumn is, in itself, a reassuring circumstance. Both the men appointed are known to me personally and, although it is my habit—and indeed a good part of my business to be critical, I should not like to venture a suggested improvement in either case. if they jointly get anything like their proper say in the arrangements, we shall, at any rate, at last get something in the nature of authentic comparative and informative data as to the practicability of the various types of modern agrimotors, and it is by no means too soon for such authoritative information...to he available to the public,.
Our dire need as a nation, not so many months ago, when we were actually beginning to wonder where the next loaf was coming from, turned our minds eagerly and hopefully to almost any old thing which makers and agents told us would turn over the ground and make it possible to grow something at least against the near-by day when we should be very glad even of " turmits and wurzels." And it must be frankly admitted that the opportunity was a golden one in more senses than one for the manufacturer and the agent of the a,grimotor.
Generally speaking, with very few exceptions, the agricultural tractors that have been brought to light doling the war days are no credit either to our business capacity nor to our technical ability to discriminate. There is no occasion to dissemble. Knowledge of the unsavoury facts is in the possession of every provincial garage and motor agent up and down the country. The agrimotor in war service was, with the few exceptions already suggested, almost always in trouble ; the type and detail designis as yet more or less elementary. But it is admitted almost on every hand that, given the right machine, a practicable agrimotor that will satisfy agricultural technicians and economists can and will be evolved, and once produced will be-utilized in great numbers.
The-trials that are to be held in September should therefore be framed so as to be very thoroughly exhaustive and very searching. The auspices under
which they will be conducted almost ensures such satisfying enquiry. We shalr then know—and only then— the real facts as to the capacity for work, immunity from breakdown, cost of upkeep, and so on, of the many types, so radically different in weight, power, design and cost, that have so far been masquerading as volunteer war workers for the emergency services of which, good, bad and very ,indifferent, we have hitherto been duly thankful.