Thanks David for the V Website.
Haven't checked very far, but spotted the 1923 Report. "REPORT OF THE PARLIAMENTARY STANDING· COMMITTEE ON RAILWAYS ON THE
PROPOSED GENERAL SCHEME OF TRAMWAYS IN THE METROPOLlS" This dealt with the electrification and possible extension of tramways. The
following para is interesting:-
"For the year ended 30th June, 1922, the surplus from the operation of the metropolitan tramways (cable and electric systems) was
£452,911. But from this sum there had to be deducted the amounts paid in rates, sick pay, interest on loans, provision for sinking
funds, reserves, &c., totalling £146,694, leaving a profit of £306,217. Out of this profit, however, had to be paid £98,106, being
the Board's statutory payment into the Consolidated Revenue of the State towards the up-keep of the Queen's Memorial Infectious
Diseases Hospital, the Metropolitan Fire Brigades Board, and the sum paid to municipal councils for the licensing equivalent. There
had also to be deducted £190,000 transferred to the Board's renewals reserve fund and £8,000 transferred to the Board's fire
insurance and public risks reserve fund, making a total deduction of £296,106, and leaving a nett surplus of £10,111 for the year.
The cable tramways yielded a nett surplus of £61,018 for the year ended 30th June, 1922; but on the other hand the electric tramways
showed a nett deficiency of £50,908. These losses were made up as follow:-Prahran and Malvern tramways, £5,7 49; Hawthorn, £2,873;
Coburg, £10,382 ; Preston, £17,835; and Footscray, £14,069. The Essendon electric tramways were not taken over by the Board till
1st August, 1922, and therefore their financial results were not included, but the Board informed the Committee that "there will be
a considerable deficiency in connexion with them."
[Some minor spelling corrections have been made - errors probably created in copying the .pdf text into word.]
Of note is the rip off for other undertakings, eg Queen's Memorial Infectious Diseases Hospital and the Metropolitan Fire Brigades
Board. Why the tramways should be required to put money to the hospital beats me. Paying the MFBB is a bit off, as money is also
paid to the fire insurance fund - smacks of double counting. The local councils get into the racket - given originally the power
to license tramways, they had to be paid off by a sum of money equivalent to licensing fees they would have continued to grab if the
tramways had remained in private - or semi private hands. Again, money was paid in rates, although the road surface maintained by
the tramways, and not in sole use by the tramways was used by their competitors. Most of the other payments would have been
properly attributed to the construction, maintenance and operation of the tramways, but it is clear that the true profit was rather
more than the nett (sic) surplus of £10,111.
The other notable point is that the cable trams were profitable, and the electric trams made thumping losses!
Unfortunately although the document is a .pdf and purports to include the plan for the new tramways, the plan is missing.
Regards
Dudley Horscroft
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links