No Guide on Duplivation
Page 31
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
APPEALS by Ribble Motor Services, Ltd., and Scottish Omnibuses, Ltd., against restrictions on duplication imposed by the Scottish Licensing Authority when authorizing a new joint night express service from Edinburgh to Liverpool, have been dismissed with costs.
Representing Scottish Omnibuses, Mr. J. B. T. Laudon declared that it had not been intended to run more than one vehicle at any particular time, but it was desired to be able to do so when traffic demanded duplication. When the Licensing Authority had decided to consider the question of duplication separately from the question of need for the service. which had been proved, no evidence was led as to the additional coaches which might be needed.
It was felt that there should be six extra vehicles available at holiday times. This made 24 available in all, taking into account the day service, on which up to 18 were permitted.
The railways had not objected to this
application. The suggestion that sonic of the duplication on the day services should be forfeited and transferred to the night service would produce an impossible operating position. The Licensing Authority had granted the service when need had been proved, but he had defeateo its object by severe restrictions on duplication.
Recommending the dismissal of the appeals, Mr. E, C. P. Lascelles declared that it was not easy to estimate the need for duplication on a new night service. The duplication allowed on the Glasgow service was no indication of the need at Edinborgh.
BILL'S SECOND READING
A SECOND reading was given to ft the Road Transport Lighting (Rear Lights) Bill last week and it was committed to a Standing Committee. This measure was presented to Parliament by Mr. J. H. Harrison, as reported last week.