Scrap the Licensing Sub-committees
Page 30
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
— says " TANTALUS "
Caustic Comments by Transport Commissioners Indicate That the Subcommittees Will Not Function to the Advantage of th: Industry
THE disclosures made by Major F. S. Eastwood, Regional Transport Commissioner for the Northeastern Area, concerning the workings of a joint road-rail licensing sub-committee, revealed a disturbing state of affairs. The collaboration between operators and railway representatives in conducting a "star chamber," before which applicants for additional vehicles and new entrants are invited to appear, seems to have resulted in a form of inquisition which is entirely new to the road haulage industry.
The undergoing of a cross-examination in the licensing courts is an experience which has daunted many applicants in the past, but to be "grilled" by a self-appointed body, shorn of statutory rights, presents an ordeat which is alarming in character.and liable to become thoroughly distasteful in practice. If this be one of the first fruits of the Road and Rail Conference, the future outlook for many operators is grim indeed. .
The Road to Reit • It may be that the idea of endeavouring to find a mutual agreement between the parties concerned—in order to avoid open conflict in the licensing courts—was conceived with good intent. It must be remembered, however, that the road to hell is said to be paved with good intentions. There is no doubt that plans which, on paper, seem to be sound and well laid, do not always work out as intended. Always the human element must be considered and allowed for—that unknown quantity which asserts itself in unsuspected and different ways. However perfect ideals may appear to be, and however laudable their objects, they cannot provide against all the tricks and turns of human nature. • Vivid imagination is not needed in visualizing the procedure at one of the sub-committee's inquiries. A striking background is already provided by the extracts from applicants' letters read in court by Major Eastwood. The case of an applicant who held an A licence before the war and was " persuaded " by a licensing sub-committee to change his application from an A to a B licence, makes unpleasant reading. Whatever might be the facilities provided by other hauliers is beside the point in this particular case.
Here is a man—both haulier and farmer—who responded to the call for increased food production and surrendered his licence by so doing. Subsequently, because of circumstances entirely beyond his control, he was forced to revert to haulage work. Presumably the sub-committee was aware of the circumstances and, as an act of mercy, gave the man permission to amend his application from an A to a B licence. When asked by Major Eastwood whether he signed the certificate for the variation, of his own free will, he replied. "No, very unfreely."
The recital of this case and the extracts from letters read by the Transport Commissioner will have revealed to many an alarming state of affairs. It is not really surprising that Major Eastwood, in unmistakable terms, expressed his viewsregarding such unofficial procedure. He has since been supported by Sir Alfred Faulkner, Licensing Authority for the Eastern Traflic Area, who stated recently that he wished to make it clear that, under the Road and Rail Traffic Act, 1933,
he can give nc; recognition to agreement reached between the applicant and the sub-committee as such. It is to be expected that all Regional Transport Commissioners will adopt a similar attitude.
Any attempt to usurp the authority of the Commissioners is an unworthy effort and one unlikely to bring credit to its promoters. No amount of good intention can turn a bad principle into a good one, and it is impossible to gloss over the effect. The prejudging of applications by an unofficial body before the cases are heard by the Licensing Authority suggests a system that is unsound ig conception as it may be unjust in practice. Moreover, any such system affords ample opportunity for the exercising of prejudice.
When an applicant appears before the Licensing Authority he does-so in the full knOwledge that he will be accorded every consideration by an individual endowed with statutory authority. He knows also that should the decision be an adverse one, he has, at least, been granted a fair hearing by an independent official who is devoid of all personal prejudice and remains untrammelled by external influences.
The setting up of the sub-committees and the practices adopted afford little evidence of the freedom and democracy vaunted by so many prominent members of the road haulage industry and proclaimed by them from the housetops during the anti-nationalization campaign. It would be interesting to know whether the big fleet owner is summoned to appear before his local licensing sub-committee when he submits an application for an additional vehicle; also, if he be asked to sign a certificate altering his application from an A to a B licence. Then, again, are the railway companies subjected to this ordeal, or has the Road and Rail Conference granted a special dispensation as part of the co-ordination plan?
A Vital Question The status of the sub-committees raises the question of legal representation provided by associations before the war. Presumably this has been made available again coincident, with the resumption of licensing-court procedure. In this event will a member be granted legal representation at the hearing of the Licensing Authority after he has refused the demands of a subcommittee, or will he be denied legal aid and be left to fight alone? Many members who come within the category of the small haulier want to know the answer. Those who are responsible for the establishment of the sub-committees may have come to the conclusion that they have made a grave tactical error.
Such bodies were probably instituted in good faith, but they can serve no really useful purpose and must engender suspicion, and, perhaps, bad feeling.
Should these sub-committees continue? The question is fully answered in the following statement made by Sir Alfred Faulkner: "I hope that I have made it clear that it is my intention that an applicant shall neither secure an advantage nor be prejudiced by the fact that he has, or has not, discussed his position with the Licensing Sub-committee of the Road and Rail 'Conference." Calm reflection urges that they be scrapped without delay