They Winnow Out Frivolous Applications VOUR contributor, " Tantalus," appears
Page 41
Page 42
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
'to have been I unduly influenced by what appears to have been a particularly unfortunate, but isolated, case in Yorkshire, in urging the. scrapping of the road-rail licensing subcommittees. The case in point, too, may well have arisen because the operator in question "played up to Major Eastwood's known antipathy to the committees. As to that, those concerned in Yorkshire will be in the best position to form an opinion.
So far as the Eastern Area is concerned,, no one could take the slightest exception to the statement of Sir Alfred Faulkner, nor could one describe it as being in any way caustic. On the contrary, it was a most reasonable statement.
If the sub-committees did nothing else, they would help to winnow out the" frivolous" applications—those where the applicants either through super-optimism or sheer ignorance of the 1933 Act, had asked for conditions which even Pickfords themselves might have had some difficulty in justifying, in the hope that they would be granted something.
So far as the committees in this area are concerned, and I speak from personal experience, the voluntary nature of the discussions is most clearly explained to the applicants who, on a number of occasions, have brought along their legal advisers.
No one could have been more dubious as to the advantages and advisability of the scheme when it was first mooted than were the hauliers in tiffs area; but after practical experience of it we are rapidly changing our views.
"Tantalus" Should See For Himself I do not know who " Tantalus " is, or _what part of the country he comes from, but I am sure that arrangements could be made, possibly through the R.H.A., for him to attend one of the sub-committees unbeknown to either the road or rail panels. Each side
would probably think he was a member of the other. He could then report at first hand.
On the question of association licensing schemes, we have no such scheme in the Eastern Area; but I assume that where schemes are in force there is some vetting of the member's application in advanceto see whether there is sufficient evidence to give it a reasonable chance of being granted. The funds are not wasted in briefing solicitors on hopeless applications. The road-rail licensing sub-committees, in effect, do little more than this. They point out to the applicant, who is often ignorant of the fact, that the onus is upon him of justifying.his application and that if he has no evidence it will be rejected; therefore it might be wise to amend his application to fit the available evidence. Surely this is in the interests of the applicant himself, even where he is a member of a licensing scheme, particularly where
such discussion with a sub-committee enables objectors to withdraw their objections?
Be Careful What You Divulge
WAVING read the comments by " Tantalus " on " road-rail licensing sub-committees, I am in full agreement that this procedure should be discontinued.
I was recently invited to attend one of these meetings, and came away with the feeling that it was intended to extract all the details of my business affairs in order to strengthen-the-case against me at the public hearing.
It is like the prosecutor asking the defendant for all his evidence before the trial takes place.
My advice to any small operator who is invited to attend is Be careful what you say and do not divulge anything that may be helpful to the objectors.