The Problem of London'sPassengercarrying Services.
Page 1
Page 2
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE S-TYPE bus can be said to have had a "good Press" on making its official debut on the streets. And, by the way, it has been enrious to note in the passage of the vehicle that not one in a hundred of the street habitues paid any regard to it. Everyone has, by now, got accustomed to the box-like lines of the K-type bus, and the improved shapeliness of the S-type bus has counteracted its greater size and thus prevented it from acquiring conspicuousness.
London's new problem in passenger-carrying concerns the ways and means for improving the service. At -the present time the service is not good. We have experienced long waits for buses (for the route required to be traversed) even, in the very heart of the City ; at the hours of peak load we have experienced delays of 25 to 35 minutes before it has been possible to get on a, bus ; after theatre hours we have, on many occasions, given up the attempt to Lravel by bus as hopeless, the vehicles seeming to have vanished from the streets at eleven o'clock.
Now that the London County Council's scheme for linking up the tramway dead ends has,finally been rejected by the House of Lords, London is again at the mercy of the omnibus and underground "combine." The operations of the " combine " must, obviously, be conducted at a profit, because the companies are not philanthropic institutions. We believe that were certain facilities afforded to the L.G.O.C., it could materially improve its services— the improvement in this case being for the benefit and convenience of the public.
Now that the threat of L.C.C. competition over the best "paying routes in London has been withdrawn, it is incumbent, first, upon the L.G.O.C. to make clear to the Ministry of Transport the nature of the facilities it requires, and, second, upon the Ministry to enquire closely into the company's scheme of operations, so that the virtual monopoly which the company is privileged to enjoy may be exercised in such a manner that the public convenience receives the fullest consideration. The projected TrafficBoard for London would, in all probability, serve a useful purpose, provided it were composed of men of the calibre of Mr. Kennedy Jones's committee, which already has effected some good.
Protecting the Driver. .
IN THE MATTER of affording the driver of a commercial vehicle adequate protection from inclement weather, certain advances have been made during the past few years, but, even now, the drivers on many vehicles are by no means given sufficient protection. It is hardly realized by many persons that the efficiency of a commercial vehicle depends to a great extent upon the• driver. A satisfied man will always treat his machine with consideration, and if he can drive without suffering from frozen bands and feet the temptation to make frequent wayside halts, in order to get a warm, is not so strong.
Quite apart from the humane point of view, there is. often the possibility of accident through the driver's hands and feet being so numbed as to cause him to fumble at the levers when sudden emergency arises. Intense cold is also -apt to cause some drivers to fall asleep, or, if not that, to drive in a semicomatose condition.
It is not as if the expense 0 adequately protecting a driver is ruinous. A few pounds extra spent at the time the vehicle, is purchased may save many pounds during the course of its running, and it must always be remembered that a well-treated employee is usually more keen on giving good service to his employer. * We do not, by any means, advocate pampering the drivers, but a good cab fitted with an adequate and, if possible, divided windscreen and side doors or storm-proof curtains should be provided on every motor vehicle. Steam wagons are notoriously bad in respect of drivers' comfort, but in the latest designs efforts are being made to improve this, although much still remains to be done. The steersman in manr wagons is still expected to re-main satisfied whilst, at least, one side of him is being soaked every time there is a downpour of rain.
The Advantages of Double Licensing of Heavy Vehicles.
IN THE PAST it has been by no means uncommon for the owners of motor tractors, legitimately classified as heavy motorcars, to register these machines both as heavy motorcars and also as road locomotives. Registration in the former category has been a simple and inexpensive matter. In the latter, it has been a more costly and complicated business. The reason for this double licensing, as it has been called, wad that there might be occasions in which the engine could be more advantageously used if not restricted to the conditions of use applying to a heavy motorcar. The main point is, of course' that the road locomotive may haul more than one trailer. On the other hand, the legal speed limit, of the road locomotive is lower than that of the tractor. The latter may travel at five miles an hour everywhere. The former may not legally travel at more than four miles an hour' anywhere, and in some places is legally 'restricted to two miles an hour.
Generally speaking, the best use could be made of the engine by regarding it as a motor tractor, but sometimes when big loads have had to be dealt with, it was found advantageous, if the roads were easy, to draw two or more trailers at a slightly reduced speed.
Those who have hitherto double-licensed their tractors will not wish to sacrifice the advantages resulting from this practice when the new system of taxation comes into force. The licence duty for a motor tractor is to amount to the substantial sum of £21; that payable in respect of a road locomotive not exceeding eight tons unladen weight is to be 225. Presumably, by paying the higher figure, the engine owner can get the privileges attaching to either class. If he chooses to regaed his machine sometimes as a motor tractor it would be hardly reasonable for the authorities to object On the grounds that he has paid a higher licence duty than was legally required of him. Thus, it would • seem that, by a payment amounting to an extra 24 per annum, the alternative classes of service obtainable from the motor tractor and the light road locomotive can still be at the disposal of the engine owner.
S.P.D. a Substitute for E.P.D.
SIR CHARLES MANDLEBERG, in the current issue of the Manchester Guardian Commercial, makes an interesting proposal for a. substitute tax for E.P.D. Granting that a tax on profits is necessary in the first instance, he says such a tax should not be so great as to interfere with a regular flow of capital into industry. The simplest way would appear to be to impose a flat-rate tax on the net profits of all concerns, public and private, after providing for a fixed pereentage on capital employed ; with a proviso that reserves and undistributed profits as at the beginning of a particular year should be treated as "capital emr4oyed " for tie purposes of
arriving at the total allowance on capital, and that remuneration for management, depreciation, etc., shall be deducted before arriving at the net profits.
• Having regard to the difficulty of obtaining new capital (he proceeds) the rate of interest to be allowed on the capital employed should not be less than 8 per cent. An authoritative estimate of the country's trading profit for 1920 'made recently puts the figure at £546,000,000, or 13 per cent. on a capital of 24,200,000,000. On this basis, there would be '2210,000,000 that coeld be subjected to the surplus profits tax suggested above after allowing 8 per cent. on capital. For 1921 the percentage of profit is not likely to come up te the 1920 estimate, but so much more capital has been put into industry that it is reasonable to suppose that the percentage may be lower without diminishing the amount taxable. Further, it is to be observed that the suggested new tax would, in its incidence, materially broaden the basis. He sees no reason why agriculture and certain professions should not be included. The rate of tax would• depend on the Chancellor's necessities. The point in which this scheme differs from existing taxes on profits is that it is based on a sound principle, namely, that every form of capital has a right to a return before it is taxed for surplus, profits. Unlike the E.P.D. and the Corporation Tax, which are based on expediency, it does not differentiate between one class of capital and another, but is fair to all. It is also fair to the Exchequer. It gives the Chancellor a. fair and reasonable basis for his Budget, and enables him to tax actual surplus profits. This is not the case with the E.P.D., which differentiates between various firms according to the operation of an arbitrary datum line. As regards the present Corporation tax, this is a charge on the profits before the ordinary share capital has any dividend at all. If the above suggestion were carried out the capital, in addifion to debentures and preferential capital, would be entitled to a fixed rate of interest out of the net profits before the flat rate tax on surplus profits was applied.
The need of the hour is to try to devise some scheme which will yield as good a, return as possible without unduly hampering business, a scheme which may be applied without causing more uneasiness from the point of view of equity than can be avoided practically. This much, argues Sir Charles, may, at least, be claimed for a Surplus Profits Duty on the lines indicated. It would secure a fair recognition of the right of capital to a return, and so would be less likely than otber forms of direct taxation to turn fresh capital into channels other than those of industry.