Unofficial Target
Page 67
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
.F prestige happened to be an important consideration for the C-licence holder, he would be getting more and more annoyed with the Labour party as the general :ction draws nearer. They doggedly refuse to admit icially his existence. At least they do the haulier the ,bious honour of including him in the list of industries ey plan to nationalize. It is clear that as individuals
e Socialists are equally determined to restrict the licence holder. But they do not consider him worth a ference in the party's policy statements.
This is one possible explanation. it is just as likely that e Socialists are risking as much unpopularity as they re by their reference to long-distance road haulage. Even , the risk they are taking may lead to disaster. Not long ,o public interest in nationalization was quiescent, and it as not regarded as a major issue for the election. More cently its political importance has increased, particularly the Conservatives and the Liberals are beginning to asp the value to them of what the Labour party have edged themselves to do.
The Socialists can be made to condemn themselves out their own mouths. In a recent television discussion, iss Jennie Lee, stimulated by a question on nationaliza)n, painted a picture of increasing State control that, bile it may have brought tears to the eyes of convinced )cialists, must have helped many waverers to determine to ye their vote elsewhere. Mr. Enoch Powell was content sit back and make encouraging noises. Miss Lee obably put his case much better than he could himself. One possible criticism is that he did not widen the iestion so as to include the C-licence holder. He might ive provoked Miss Lee to enlarge her attack in the same rection, but the C-licence holder might also have been yen something tangible to answer. As it is, the haulier, cause he is proscribed by name, can take relief in ;non. He has been handed a declaration of war and )body can blame him for fighting. The C-licence holder like the civilian in modern warfare. He cowers in his letter, and feels no safer because officially he is not a ilitary target. Temperamentally, he would rather be iounting the barricades or helping the anti-aircraft Inners.
Potential Threat
The choice for the C-licence holder is hard. He would ke to know definitely where he stands with the Labour arty, but a public statement may bring disadvantages • ith it. There is a hidden strength in the fact that most eople who have no direct interest in transport are unaware f the potential threat to the C-licence holder. If uestioned, they would think it incredible that a political arty wished to stop traders from carrying their own goods. hey would consider it as on a level with a threat to rohibit the use of private cars.
Political issues such as nationalization are not common. lost of the debates in Parliament, even some of the most crimonious. reveal no profound difference of opinion they are examined carefully. The Opposition have a ght to probe and criticize the actions of the Government, ut would very likely do exactly the same if they were in ower. On certain matters, such as road construction, the reservation of the railways and the reduction in the umber of accidents, the parties do not even bother to isguise their agreement.
It is not always clear why this should be so. There
seems no reason why one party should not be in favour of preserving the railways and the other in favour of their abolition. Such a polarization of policy is extremely unlikely. If the railways fall out of favour, the process will be gradual and it will be common to all parties. Nationalization resembles those substances that make good conductors. It is highly charged with the current of party politics, whereas the railways are practically immune.
In this respect most people would place the C-licence holder in the same category as the railways, If he is to be restricted, it should be only in response to overwhelming public demand cutting completely across party barriers, Such a demand is so improbable that it can be ignored.
The dilemma of the C-licence holder arises from the fact that, almost in secret, the Labour party are manufacturing an image of him as a party political figure. If he challenges them, he is in appearance accepting the image as true. He runs the risk that a proportion of Socialists will become his antagonists because they are prepared to accept their party's policy as a whole without examining each detail. If he keeps silent, he can be satisfied that he has hardly an enemy. Unfortunately, such enemies as there are happen to be leading figures in the Labour party. Left to their own devices, they will spring the trap if and when they are in power and ready to introduce restricting legislation. By that time the C-licence holder may have left it too late to mobilize support.
Universal Goodwill The lack of political heat assures the C-licence holder at the moment or almost universal goodwill. It also tends
to make public opinion less stable. People have no standards by which to judge the arguments put up by
either side. Where nationalization of road haulage is concerned there is abundant evidence. The Labour party have made the experiment already and it was conspicuously unsuccessful. The C-licence holder cannot point to a similar experience.
The public have no rooted objections to restrictions as such. They are familiar with licensing for various purposes, including the running of a road haulage business. The Conservatives, greatly to their credit, dismantled most of the complicated apparatus of control established during the war, but have not given complete freedom. The growing inclination of all Governments is to keep industry under surveillance, to curb monopolies and price rings, and to
frown upon restrictive practices. In principle, public opinion is behind the Governments.
The right to carry one's own goods is so natural that merely to state it carries complete conviction. Like many truisms it does not always benefit from expansion. As soon as the C-licence holder turns to examples and analogies he runs the risk of blurring the issue. He is tempted—and sometimes gives way to the temptation—to maintain that he should know better than anybody else whether or not he needs his own vehicles. In most cases this is true, but the principle must admit of exceptions.
Not every trader is omniscient ancr.wise; it has to be conceded that occasionally C-licensed vehicles will be bought for traffic that could be more effectively carried by public transport. In the same way some people would be well advised to get rid of their cars. Nobody suggests making it compulsory to prove need for a car, and the trader's van or lorry is in exactly the same category.