Road Transport Activities
Page 61
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
in PARLIAMENT
By. air Special Parliamentary Correspondent
London Transport Bill.
LT AST Tuesday the House of Com_Unions gave a second reading to the London Passenger Traesport Bill, after a Unionist amendment for rejection had been defeated by 271 votes to 224. That amendment declared that the Bill provided for the nationalization of London passenger transport, deprived local authorities of control in respect of their various undertakings, took the property of private owners out of their control, gave them no option of sale, vested in the Minister of Transport bureaucratic powers and constituted him, and not a judicial tribunal, the Court of Appeal in such important matters as the provision or withdrawal of traffic services and facilities.
Mr. II, Morrison, Minister of Transport, moved the second reading and explained the principles underlying the proposed legislation, as well as giving details of the various clauses. These. were dealt with at some length in last week's issue of The Commercial Motor ; there were, however, several fresh points in Mr. Morrison's speech which may be referred to.
Some New Points.
SPEAKING of the vast character of London passenger transport, he said it was computed that in the London area the number of passenger-journeys yearly was 4,000,000,000, and if competition involved a needless charge of id. per passenger-journey the aggregate cost would be £4,000,000 a year, which, he thought, would be better spent in developments and the reduction of fares.
There would be transferred to the proposed new board all the passengercarrying organizations in the London traffic area, in order to obtain a completely consolidated undertaking. Only the suburban lines of the wain-line railways would be left out. An important factor to be taken into account by the arbitration tribunal would be the provisions of section 13 of the London Traffic Act, 1924, that section declaring that no -value would be conferred upon any undertaking by that Act and that in the event of any undertaking providing means for transport for the London traffic area being purchased compulsorily by any local or public authority, that part of the value of the undertaking attributable directly or indirectly to the Act should not be taken into account.
Mr. Morrison read a letter from Lord Ashfield, which defined his position and that of his companies towards the Bill.
Lord Ashfield's Attitude.
THE letter to the Minister ran as follows :— " ihre have now before us the text of the London Passenger Transport Bill, and learn that the Second Reading is to
take place on Monday next. Shortness of time has prevented us from consulting our security holders, whose interests are vitally affected by the Bill, and it is necessary that we should put the whole subject before them, having regard to the magnitude and importance of their stake in matters covered by the Bill. "So far we have proceeded on the basis of direct negotiation with you and your advisers, and although these negotiations have not yet proceeded far, we have your assurance that they will be continued. We assume that, if and when agreement is reached, and we have consulted our stockholders, the Bill will be adapted to give effect to such agreement.
"For many years we have pursued a policy which is in accord with the main principle of the Bill, namely, that there should be a consolidation of the local passenger-transport undertakings of London, under a unified control and with a common financial interest. We are, therefore, not proposing to challenge this principle of the Bill. But when we examine the Bill, section by section, we may find many things with which we are not agreed, which are also matters of principle. "In these circumstances we rely upon the assurance which you have given us that neither we nor our security holders will be prejudiced as the result of our taking no action upon the Second Reading stage, and we regard ourselves as f Fee to raise on the Committee stage all matters which affect or concern us."
Independent Proprietors.
WITH the exception of the independent bus proprietors (who, Mr. Morrison declared, had much inismuierstood the Bill) and, possibly, the London County Council, although he was not sure of that, it might be said that none of the existing transport undertakings had really challenged the fundamental economic and administrative bases on which the Bill proceeded,
He mentioned that power was given to the board to run road services beyond the 25-mile radius. In that case the board would have to get a licence and the service thus run must be related to the London system. The board would have powers to make a working agreement with the operating authorities and private operators on the fringe, but it would not he concerned with the longdistance services which did not pick up Or set down in the London Traffic Area.
The traffic advisory committee would remain and become more municipal in character, thus acting as a constant liaison between the board and the local authorities. There would be also a standing joint committee between the board and the railway companies. They might co-operate and Work together, and even elaborate a pooling scheme. but for that policy the approval of the Minister would have to lie secured.
He opposed the Conservative amendent and he maintained that the matter as 'essentially a business matter anal ahove party controversy.
Conservative Opposition.
TN• the discussion which followed, -congratulations were conveyed to Ir. Morrison upon his appointment as a Cabinet Minister. Sir P. Cunliffeister, in moving the Conservative endineiat for the rejection of the Bill, said the question was not whether there should be co-ordination of London traffic. The action of the present Government, in 1929, in throwing out the two traffic Bills which had passed their third reading prevented a large measure of co-ordination in Londou traffic to-day. Whilst it was said that the board 'tfrould be removed from politics, Sir P. unliffe-Lister maintained this was not so, because the Minister would appoint the hoard and he could appoint a completely Socialist board and he could iemove members of the board. Neither the shareholders in the concerns nor the local authorities were to have any ay in the operations of the board, on !rich the -whole of their investment
, epended. The Minister was the rbiter on the withdrawal or provisions f facilities.
Mr. Percy Harris was not satisfied that the only way to solve the problem was by setting up a monopoly. It was unsafe to hand over such a vital serVice to a private monopoly or trust, however much it might be controlled, 1o_ ut if traffic was to be left to a monoly it should be by a local authority.
e suggested that at least two members of the board should be appointed by the London County Council.
Colonel Ashley declared that the two Bills put forward in 3929 by the Loudon traffic combine and the London minty Council would have introduced verything that the present Bill brought in, except the small outside us owners, who represented not more than 5 per cent. of the total numbet
f buses.
Deleting Certain Provisions.
R. HANNON made an appeal to the Minister of Transport to elete those provisions which would Liable the new traffic monopoly to anufacture its own vehicles and uipment. If the clauses were passed hey would take out of the hands of O highly organized body of British producers of public vehicles the opportunity for supplying a large section of the home market and weaken their powers to compete in foreign markets. Mr. Graham, President of the Board of Trade, having replied and pointed out that in the judgment of the Governent there was no alternative to the Ian now proposed, the amendment was -ejected and the Bill read a second time, ter which it was committed to a joint committee of both Houses. '
Direction Indicators.
THE question of issuing regulations dealing with the use of mechanical appliances on motorcars for indicating intended changes of direction is under consideration, but the Minister of Transporkatates that it will be necessary for him flint to consult the motoring organizations.