THE RETURNED LORRY QUESTION.
Page 20
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A New Scheme Outlined and Criticised.
SOME DECIDEDLY INTERESTING proposals upon the subject; of .!` Work for the Returned Army Lorry ". have been put forward by Afr James Armstrong in the pages of ".The World's Work," Before peg:weeding to consider the scheme
itself it seems necessary to criticise briefly one or two of the preliminary statementa by which it is prefaced. There seems to be an impression in the author's mind
that, failing the production of some such scheme; the authorities—presumably in this case the Surplus Government Property Disposal Board—are between two stools.-. .
He is quite right in stating that inanufaCturers. are unanimous in the view that to throw all these vehicles back upon the market by auction would be to para lyse the whole industry and cause it serious and permanent injury. On the other hand, he appears to assume that sale by auction wpuld be the solution favoured by the taxpayer, who has paid for the vehicles and wants to get the best possible return. He
May be.right so far as concerns the taxpayer who has never troubled to think out this particular problem and, consequently, is liable to jump to a hasty conclusion.
In our opinion, however, anyone . whoa takes the trouble to think the thing over carefully Will realize
that, by putting the Vehicles up to auction, the
Government would not be doing the best for anybody. The price got for the first batch or SQ might be good,
but later on prices would fall to bits (as a fair num ber of the lorries themselves would do if put straight into commercial work) and the vehicle's would be practically given away. If the taxpayerwants the lorries to be sold for the most they will fetch, he would be going quite the wrong way about it if he were to encourage the process of auction in quantity.
It is a mistake to suppbse that, in this matter, the taxpayer and the manufacturer are on opposite sides el the table. In point of fact, they are on the same side, and it is in the interests of broth that some such 3cheine as that which has already been put forward
more than once should he adopted. . I
We need not repeat that scheme in detail, but will merely remind our readers that the idea is that all ve
hicks should be offered to their own. manufacturers
for repair and overhaul, following upon which the manufacturers would give them their guarantees of condition and would market them along with their
new products, either' direct or through their agents.. The main point abont this scheme is. that the result of overhaul and guarantee would be to increase the sale value of the. vehicles by an amount far exceeding the cost of the overhaul. The scheme would, therefore, benefit the taxpayer and at the same time would
minimize the damage done to the industry. .
We cannot agree that the .returned motor vehicle will be only a small item of the bulk of returned sm.-. plus Government tores. It is probably by far, the biggest item in the whole list, and is certainly big
enough to justify it in being treated as an individual case and not lumped into a common arrangement applying equally to pen nibs and tin buildings. The taxpayer, if he knows his business, would have something very pungent to say about any Government organization which was foolish enough to allow the surplus lorries to be thrown upon the auction market. All this, however, while it may serve to clear our n44
ideas of false impressions, does not for an instant maply that a subsidiary or alternative scheme is unworthy of consideration. Both taxpayer and motor manufacturer would be glad enotigh if the vehicles could be absorbed and usefully employed in Government service of a productive character until their term of life is run. Thus' adherence to the scheme mentioned above does not decrease onr.interest in the distinctly important • proposal that Mr. Armstrong has to make. Particalarly is this so, because that preposaI has for its object the vepy prompt and complete reconstruction of our' road Syatena'. to 'meet 'Modern
needs. • • •
If this great thing could be achieved with the assistance of the returned lorries, then the motor industry would, we are convinced,' welcome the proposition, even if it meant some direct loss at the Moment, because upon the quality of roads ultimately depends the extent of the _demand for motors.. Upon this same factor depend the costs of operation' of all form's "of road transport. By bringing down these costs we can cheapen practically every -commodity, and, therefore, it is perfectly sound national policy to spend a big capital sum upon the thorough reconstruction of our high roads. Mr. Armstrong estimates the mileage of these at 15,000 and the cost of reconstruction at about £300;000,000, .which sounds an enormous figure until we remember that the war probably aces not cost inneh -less in a month, while the roads will be a national asset for–centuries. The proposal is that all the available lorries should be used up in assisting road construction and carrying the. necessary materialS. At the same time, large numbers of drivers and an immense. quantity of other labour would be kept in employment of a useful kind.
Mr. Armstrong puts the number of returned vehicles at about 50,000, .which would mean about three vehicles to the mile of 'main road. Our own estimate is somewhat higher, and we think there might be five or even six vehicles available to the mile. If this number were believed to be more than sufficient, then his scheme would become supplementary instead of alternative, and it is particularly on -this account that IV 3 consider his suggestions to be highly valuable.
Suppose, for example, that 25,000 vehicles were wanted for the roads a-nd that, of the returned vehicles, 20,01X were, of foreignorigin, we should then take for this work the whole of the foreigners and 5000. British machines; the . remainder would be . disposed of through their manufacturers as already prba. posed, and we should have completely disposed of the most awkward part of the whole problem, • which is how to get rid of the foreign machines, the manufacturers of which are too far distant to undertake"ae-pairs and overhauls.
The makers of British vehicles do not Want these machines to fill our civilian needs in this country or
to he exported to tO COlonie.s. .either Case their presence might do great harm to-the established goodwill of the British industry. Therefore, if the scheme of road construction can be so planned as to absorb, at least, all the foreign returned vehicles, it willhave simplified the whole position immensely and, for the rest, the British mantifaeturers canbe trusted to market their own second-hand vehiclesat the best • possible prices and only in such condition as to enable them" to give goOd service in the hands Of the eiViliart user.