The real cost
Page 34
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
VIr Harvey's letter (CM June 27) s a good example of the nuddled thinking on transport iroblems so prevalent even unongst those who should know atter. I would like to dear up just one of the several misconceptiOns raised — road versus rail cost to the nation.
The haulage costs Mr Harvey quotes — road eix times as high as 'rail are correct. But they are the price to the customer, not the cost to the nation. Taking price first, the question then is not should we force more freight to go by rail but, in the light of this great discrepancy, why do 90 per cent of all goods moved in Britain go kr road?
Primarily It is the quality of service, in terms of speed, reliability, door to door handling, lower losses and breakages. The essential flexibility of road transport can never be matched by any other form.
Rail transport is splendid for goods — mainly in bulk — moving over 100 miles. Below this limit it becomes uneconomic to use the railways — even at this price.
As far as the cost to the nation, in the case of rail the price to the customer is insufficient to pay for the service and must be subsidised — by the nation.
In the case of road a large proportion of the price is repaid 'to the Government — to the radon—in the form of taxes, KENNETH CANNELL, Deputy Director, British Road Federation.