• The M.H.C.S.A. Deputation to the Minister of Transport
Page 38
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Constructive Criticisms of the Road Traffic Act on an Important and Comprehensive Scale by a Representative Organization
MHE agenda agreed upon for discussion, when the depu tation from the Motor Hirers and Coach Services Association, Ltd., was received by the Minister of Transport on Wednesday last, itself constituted a fair and thorough criticism of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, in the light of several months of experience of the Act's administration.
Perhaps the most interesting items were those concerning the Traffic Commissioners' procedure. Dealing. with these in order, the limitation of the number of vehicles to be used was described by the association as unfairly penalizing the public and preventing expansion. The drastic limitation of picking-up points was stated to be destroying the utility of the public service vehicle and to be causing the public to incur additional travelling expense, which it can ill afford. Exception was taken to the practice of making compliance with the speed limit a condition of a service licence.
It was suggested that Commissioners should adopt a standardized form for the presentation of evidence in support of licence applications, and the method of the Metropolitan Commissioner in this respect was referred to as being a satisfactory one. A recommendation was put forward that no restriction as to the classes of passenger that can be carried should be placed upon regular express services, which, at present, are in some cases prohibited from carrying persons making a single journey. As regards excursions, it was asked that licences should not prohibit the picking-up of passengers at places other than the starting point, as this is inconvenient to the public.
Features of the system which involve undue expense. in the obtaining of road service licences were enumerated, including the freedom permitted in the lodging of objections, the hearing of backings before primary licences, the need for personal attendance before Commissioners in whose areas no passengers are intended to be picked up and, importantly, the backing of excursion and tour licences. It was submitted that, when a primary licence has been granted, a backing .should not be refused, although certain conditions might be imposed, because the position at present is that the use of the highway can be refused to a subject of the Crown. Finally, it was alleged that unnecessary expense is caused by permitting objections from interested operators in the case of licence renewals that involve no change in the existing services.
Unduly Protecting Municipal Interests.
As regards protection to municipal undertakings, whilst the method of fixing fares was not objected to, that of imposing restricted areas was regarded by the association as being against the public interest. The last item concerning the Commissioners' procedure was the need for facilities to cope with special occasions to meet sudden public demands for transport.
The agenda included several interesting points in relation to the special problem of the Metropolitan Traffic Area. The exclusion of motor coaches from the central area was regarded as creating a situation opposed to the public interest ; the association intends to make further representations in this important matter. The application of Restricted Streets Orders to motor coaches was objected to on the ground that it was not intended that they should be so applied. In the submission of the association there is no authority under the Act for demanding the provision of terminal sites on private property, neither any justification B24 for differentiating in this respect between motor coaches and other road users.
Dealing with the Act generally, 18 sections amongst the first 90 sections are criticized as being unsatisfactory. Under Section 4 (4) it was recommended that driving licences should be available for periods from one to five years at proportionate fees. Under Section 10 a speed limit of 35 m.p.h. was recommended for public-service vehicles, it being claimed that the limit of 30 m.p.h. causes accumulative delay to other road users.
Under •Section 10 (3) no prosecution for exceeding the speed limit can succeed upon the opinion of one witness submitted as evidence, but single expressions of opinion, backed by statements as to a speedometer reading, are being accepted. The association has, therefore, recommended that liability to conviction should be possible only when the opinion is that of more than one person.
Variation of Drivers' Hours.
As regards the limitation of drivers' hours, under Section 19 it was recommended that variation should be permitted after joint application by employers and employees.
Under Section 25, a bridge authority has power to prohibit use of a bridge merely by displaying a notice, and the association has submitted that provision ought to be made for an appeal to the Minister prior to prohibition coming into force, suggesting that notice should be published in the gazette of Notices and Proceedings 28 days in advance. So that public service vehicles might come within the proviso in the first paragraph of this section, it was suggested that the weight limit therein be increased from 5 tons to 7i tons.
Under Section 46, the Minister may, with or without public inquiry, prohibit or restrict the use of certain roads. The association has held that a public inquiry should be obligatory. The definition of a contract carriage under Section 61 (2) has been stated to require clearer explanation.
An important point concerning objections by railway companies and others to road service applications is that affected by Section 72 (3), which permits those already providing transport facilities not only along, but also near to, the routes covered by the application, to lodge objections. The M.H.C.S.A. delegates have recommended that the words " or near to" be deleted. To remove the possibility of railway companies' etc., instituting cheap fares after road fares on particular routes have been fixed by Commissioners under Section 72, a recommendation has been put forward that the Commissioners should have special regard to excursion rates offered by any alternative method of travel. The immediate suspension of a licence under Section 74, has been described as creating severe hardship to the public, and a proviso has been submitted that suspension should be possible only when offence by the licensee was frequent.
The power afforded the Minister under Section 75, to direct a private business as to how it shall keep its accounts and records, was one of the outstanding points raised by the deputation, it being regarded as an undue interference with private enterprise. The limitation of driving licences, under Section 77 (3), to such types of vehicle as may be specified, is regarded as unsatisfactory, and a suggestion has been made that the types of vehicle shall be divided into unmistakable categories. The M.H.C.S.A. representatives made some general observations on the Act, stating that the Commissioners usually had insufficient regard for the historical establishment of, and the capital invested in, a business, also that more care was necessary to protect the public against inconveniences, such as changes of vehicles required to complete a journey. Co-ordination between Commissioners in different areas was strongly urged, and it was claimed that provision should be made for the instituting of new services to see if they would create for themselves sufficient demand to warrant their continuance.. Temporary licences were suggested.