AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Big Fight on Municipal Private

4th February 1955
Page 38
Page 38, 4th February 1955 — Big Fight on Municipal Private
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Keywords : Bus

Hire

Associations .Organize Opposition to Bill : Wider Powers for B.T.C.?

ASSOC1ATIONS representing coach and bus companies are organizing determined opposition to the operation of contract carriages by municipalities, and to the restoration of the British Transport Commission's powers to undertake private hire anywhere,

which the Transport Act, 1953, removed. The B.T.C. and the Public Transport Association have also presented to Parliament petitions against Birmingham Corporation's Bill authorizing the municipal undertaking to grant free or concessionary travel to certain sections of the community. The principal object of the criticism is,.however, Mr. E. Short's Public Service Vehicles (Contract Carriages and Special Travel Facilities) Bill, which is to have its second reading on February 18. The Passenger Vehicle Operators' Association " will strenuously oppose its unwelcome provisions during all stages in Parliament." They will be supported by the Birmingham Horse and Motor Vehicle Owners' Association, Northern Road Transport Owners' Association, Manchester Horse and Motor Owners' Association, and the local organization at Bolton. These four associations are meeting Members of Parliament in London this week to discuss measures to be taken against Mr. Short's Bill, This authorizes local authorities to run contract carriages on journeys originating within their areas. They would not be given power to begin journeys from, say, big housing estates outside the municipal area. Manchester has taken power to do so under private legislation, but Mr. Short's Bill does not perpetuate this authority. The idea is to enable local authorities to augment their revenue by using vehicles for private hire at off-peak periods and at the week-ends.

Clause 2 of the Bill would permit the B.T.C., through the London Transport Executive, to engage in private hire from London to any point in the country. Our Parliamentary correspondent says that if this clause attracts such criticism as to endanger the whole Bill, it may be dropped.

"Immense Damage" P.V.O.A. say that these proposals " would do immense damage to existing non-municipal operators and constitute direct unfair competition," because they would, in the case of local authorities, " remove that safeguard agreed by Parliament to prevent unnecessary expenditure of public or ratepayers' money, "In the case of London Transport, the position as it was, following the passing of the Transport Act, 1947, would be restored, and London Transport, which already has monopoly powers, would again be able to compete unfairly with other operators by running contract carriages, possibly all over the country."

Company interests fear that the entry of municipalities into an already highly competitive market will force down charges to an uneconomic level, so that n30 'private enterprise will suffer and local authorities, far from augmenting their earnings, will incur even greater deficits. They claim that municipalities already occupy a privileged position in relation to stage services.

Mr. Short's Bill also empowers local authorities to grant free travel, or reduced fares, to pensioners (men of not less than 65 years and women of 60 years); young people under 15 years, or over 15 years but under 13 years and still undergoing full-time education; the blind; and people suffering from the loss of a leg or from an injury which seriously impairs their ability to walk.

Wider Scope The provision concerning crippled people is wider than that operated by Birmingham Corporation, who limited the concession to those who had suffered war injuries. Mr. Short's Bill would include industrial injuries. Local authorities would be empowered to pay for the concessions out of the rates.

Mr. G. Hill said at the annual dinner of the Birmingham Association, last week, that they had no quarrel with that part of Mr. Short's Bill dealing with free travel for old-age pensioners. "The only difference of opinion is on who should pay for it—the transport department or the ratepayers," he said. The Association would, however, do all in their power to prevent mupicipalities from running contract carriages.

The B.T.C. have petitioned against Birmingham's Bill as a matter of principle. Free or concessionary travel, they said last Saturday, would set a 'precedent which might oblige every bus operator in the country to give similar facilities. This would involve an immense levy on ordinary passengers.

The P.T.A.'s case is that if Birmingham's Bill created a precedent, other operators who were in competition with municipalities would be placed in an unfair position.

It is thought that the Minister of Transport will be asked by the Cabinet to submit an early report on the efforts being made in Parliament to legalize free and concessionary travel.


comments powered by Disqus