Nov. 7.
The traffic problems sits on the shoulders of authority with leaden Jweight. That is the deduction to be drawn from the survey of. recent efforts to deal with it. The wheels of reform grind slowly, as this journal pointedly noted' in May last in recalling that the China Omnibus Company had Ibeen able to put their double-deckers on the streets, just ten years after their chairman had inmated his desire to include those now popular vehicles in his origanization's service. The impossi-Ibility of one year becomes the probability of another and the actriality of a third—at appropriately ranged intervals. So the present reluctance to go the whole hog and appoint a Transport Board instead of the amiable Traffic Committee, which now tries {to acquire momentum by meeting regularly, may be broken down in the march of time. Finances, of course, stand much in the way of drastic trae reform. Yet, if finances do not improve, the prob-Jem will solve itself as Shanghai will become moribund and, therefore, past tra Me salvation. This is written in no disparagement of the Council's Departments or Committees or Boards now wrestling with ithe various aspects of the problem, merely cites events to prove that the logical implications of the trafic congestion ultimately vindicate themselves. The danger is that the accentuation of that congestion may increase more rapidly than the process of remedial action, such as street-widening and the ike. That enhances public impatience which, although much {of it based on a deplorable lack fof a sense of proportion and, in" deed, ignorance of the effects of modern transport on other large cities, has its constructive value and, consequently, its practical importance. Moreover, the slow= ness of reform in one direction has tended to prevent improvement in another with the result that mutually destructive conditions are allowed to develop.
No better description of Shanghai's traffic problem has been given than in the statement of a member of the Traffic Committee last July. He said:
Shanghai's trafic problem is one of the most dificult in the world, and it is quite impossible to adopt piecemeal measures until the whole question of trafic control has. been seriously studied in all its Here clearly, is the case for a Transport Board. The Traffic Committee's labours should not be belittled. They deserve com~ mendation if only for their production of the admirable diagnosis now quoted. But the Committee in essence is more a consulta tive body than an executive instrument, Its discussions _probably are "governed by the referjences made to it by the Council or the departments of the Council. If it possesses the power to initiate ropocals, it certainly lacks the Jpower to force those proposals to Jadoption except by the departmental process which is obviously limited in scope. The creation of, Transport Board in London, under the authority of the Ministry of Transport, has been the direct cause of the recent improve ment in London's traffic arrangements. So long as the various tramway, omnibus, tube, under-Jground and taxi-cab organizations [were working independently, with the general disciplinary control of the Metropolitan Police handling jonly one side of the traffic problem, the prospect of relieving congestion was faint. Moreover the police authority itself was Jdivided, in that it took another form within the boundaries of the ICity of London—a comparatively Jsmali but highly important area in the Metropolis. It is impossible to read the reports of the discussions of the Traffic Committee here ithout nothing the frequency with Jwhich it is asserted that certain Jadministrative or constitutiond obstacles block the adoption of otherwise feasible suggestions. A Transport Board with full powers of ce-ordination and overriding authority should alter all that.
The movement for the close cooperation of the three Municipal governments in securing a common agreement on {fe essential improvements in the public transport services here, is in the right direction. It, at least, may facilitate the comprehensive survey to /which importance was attached by the expert already quoted. "It may also. remove other difficulties. Thus, when the Commissioner of Public Works rightly points out that the provision of a swift moving tramear service in Avenue Edward VII is barred by an intermunicipal agreement, the obvious course is for that agreement to, be reviewed by the two authorities, always assuming that the proposed innovation is acceptable on its merits. Similarly the objection to 'Shanghai's adoption of the up-to-date policies of cities, which have torn up their tramway tracks in densely congested areas, might be susceptible to treatment' in consultation with the utility companies concerned. The utility companies are often the subject of unthink-\ing attacks. Shanghai has too much commonsense to follow that unfruitful line. The willing cooperation of the companies, gent-pressed by discriminating. offi cial presentation of the public's needs, is an essential factor in traffic reform. The companies, under amazing difficulties, have done good work. They probably /would welcome the more scientific handling of the problem in which they are vitally interested, Sad experience in other parts of the world should discourage any be-Hef In the superiority of offtctally controlled to company-managed enterprises. Transport poliey—if only for the sake of the ratepayfers' pockets—should proceed by the instrumentality of utility eom= panies but should assist them to eliminate wasteful competition and to ce-ordinate their public service. Whether a Here-Belisha can arise in Shanghai to see this matter through remains to be seen, but it is certainly time that the various authorities ceased to think in watertight compartments. They admit that the problem is intricate. That is all the more reason for paying it the compliment of an exhaustive, practical and modern investigation,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.