Mrs. C, this is deplorable
Page 18
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A "DIRECT attack on the right of trade in and industry to choose the system of transport they consider most suitable for their needs." That is how Mrs. Castle's h.g.v. licensing proposals are described this week.
The British Road Federation, in its monthly Bulletin says: "It is to be deplored that Mrs. Castle has allowed herself to be persuaded that the direction of traffic against commercial judgement is in the interests of the country's economy.
"It is fallacious to employ, as does Mrs. Castle, the argument that 'a small amount of traffic could be transferred to rail without imposing additional costs on industry'.
"If this were the case, there would be no need to force it on to rail. Industry does not use road transport to spite the railways; it does so because it pays it to do so.
"And who would be able to prove that any rate offered by the railways reflects its true cost and does not contain an element of cross-subsidization? It is more than likely that not even BR would be able to prove it.
"Transport is not an end in itself. The acid test for the suitability of a form of transport is the choice of the user. No unproven claims can be allowed to distort this basic principle."
The Federation welcomes as "long overdue" the proposal to free from carrier licensing goods vehicles of up to 30cwt. And quality licensing for all other goods vehicles, it says, "can but only be acceptable to responsible operators".