Motorbus Fares.
Page 2
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Case For and Against Increases in Greater London.
By the Editor.
There is a remarkable diversity of opinion amongst traffic and financial experts as to the expediency of raising motorbus fares in London. There is a somewhat close analogy between the position of motorbus companies and newspaper proprietors, in that any such advances, once it is determined to make them, must perforce be made in " jumps" which represent considerable percentages. It is not practicable, having regard to established custom, for a motorbus or other passenger-.carrying undertaking to vary its wellsettled stages, any more than it is for a newspaper or weekly journal radically to alter its size, make-up, or style. Minor adjustments, necessarily of a rela tively 'unimportant character, can be made piecemeal ; they count for little, in the direction of either economy or revenue, and cause maximum disturbance.
Duty to Shareholders.
We can imagine that the responsible officials anddirectors of the London .motorbus undertakings are torn between the effects and likely effects of conflicting factors. Regard 'for their duty to shareholders, at first sight, must impose the elimination of all
fares, and an increase of a very huge proportion of the existing id. fares to at least lid., if not to 2d. It is possible that these gentlemen, who probably realize that they are in a fiduciary position, have waited until the circumstances by which they are and have been. confronted have already more than become sufficiently serious to justify a really big change, once and for all, instead of two or more smaller changes. We -here infer the possibility of an all-round increase of the Id. fare to 2d., instead of reaching that ultimate adjust ment by two increments of each.
Why Ignore Effect of Board of Trade's Instructions to Railway Companies?
Our examination of the situation, in so far as present-day factors are available to us, and with an intimate knowledge of the facts concerning pre-war costs, revenue, mileage, passengers carried, and other essential data, lead s us to conclude that such a jump, as from Id. to 2d., despite its amounting to 100 per cent., may soon be unavoidable. Railway fares were put up by 50 per -cent. several months ago, with the result that many one-time railway travellers have fallen back upon the unrevised scale of motorbus fares. This alternative should not be available. Its existence, in a sense may be held to be contrary' to the wishes of the GOvernment, for many people are undoubtedly encouraged to travel unnecessarily by motorbus' on account of the lowness of the charges•for conveyance. This iswasteful. The " joy-rider " is unduly encouraged; the while business travellers are incommoded or crowded out. Above all, the shareholder has his property damaged without return.
Duty to the Public.
. We are cognisant of the importance of keeping faith -with the public. It is contended by some that. the public, after the peace, whenever that period of return to normal existence may be initiated, will remember the fact that motorbus fares were not advanced, and will show its affection for this platonic consideratioe by Consistent support thereafter. The public, we think, will travel at any given-time, other things being equal, by the cheapest and quickest means of conveyance. The public has a notoriously-short memory : it took little more than nine days to forget that "The Daily Mail V had burnt the Legations at Pekin, for example. We do not accept the view that the public will be grateful to the officials and directors of any
$20 motorbus company for throwing away the shareholders' money, such a .result being the inexplicable lateness of putting up the fares.
Nobody More Surprised than the Passengers. The duty of proprietors of stage-carriages to the public is to carry them expeditiously, with safety, in • clean vehicles, and at the maximum point-to-point speeds that accord with police and other regulations. There is no duty, actual or implied, upon proprietors of any such vehicles, and particularly upon proprietors of vehicles which are owned by trading companies, to carry the public at an undeniable loss to themselves. The public does net expect it, and the public, at the present time above all others, knows that it must -on the average pay double for everything. The public does not hope to he able to continue paying the old prices only for conveyance by . motorbus, whatever sections of it may hope so to continue by tramcar, at the expense of the general . body of ratepayers, if they travel in L.C.C. vehicles.
. Is It Policy? • Considerations of policy may be at the back of this dilatoriness on the part of the officials and directors who are responsible for watching their shareholders' money as matters stand. If far-seeing policy necessarily dictates a loss of money, we have nothing to say .against it, because it is obviously better to conform to a settled and sound policy, and to bear the involved loss, than lightly to abandon any policy of the kind. We, of course, know quite well that there are considerations of far-reaching policy, as between electrictramcar and motorbus operation and charges, in Greater London. The best policy for the municipallyowned tramway. undertaking must, however, for political reasons if no other, at all times be essentially different from the best policy for any trading company. The former may and does react upon the latter, the converse also holding good. Is it possible that the position is worn down to the fine issue of who will put up fares first? We certainly ea.nnot dismiss this possibleexplanation as inadmissible, but we do. not like to -think that the financial interests of thousands of in.vestora are thus possibly being jeopardized in deference to ill-defined opinions concerning political results.
Ten Miles by Motorbus for the Price of a Pint.
. of Beer.
If the true explanation does lie in the direction to' which we have referred, it is now only a matter-of a few days for the L.C.C. to disclose its position, and it may then be seen that the finances of its electrictramcar undertaking are in such a bad way that the upward lead in fares will have to be given in respect of the tramcars. Expectations in that direction on the part Of motorbus officials and directors may account for the -delay for which they are in any event accountable. We should prefer to have seen them deal with the war situation, on purely commercial lines, rather than on confusing and shifting bases of . combinations of utopian and partly -sociological estimates. One hard fact is found in the universal high rate of wages which are being paid and, what is more, spent. Why should not some of these high wages go into the eTchequers. of the motorbus companies? The average man does not expect to pay, under war con• ditions, foiten miles of motorbus travelling, the same that -he does for P. pint of beer ! Why force this situaition on him ? Who is the gainer—and who is the loser ?