Barn-door Politics
Page 67
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
SLOW-MOVING, large and unwilling to retaliate. This is a fair definition of the ideal target, and the creatures it describes are doomed to extinction unless steps are taken to preserve them. In danger of such a doom is the abnormal, indivisible load, which also happens to be slow-moving and large, and carried by operators who have shown themselves perhaps unwisely reluctant to reply to the frequent attacks made upon them.
The outsize load is fair game for anybody in a splenetic mood. He knows that he will get wide support from other road users. Often without knowing the circumstances, he writes indignant letters to his M.P. or to the Press, because he has been held up by the passage of what he describes in such terms as "lumbering juggernaut" or "travelling monstrosity." His anger instructs him that, whatever the regulations may say, no road vehicle has the right to be as large as that.
The politely worded apologies carried on some of the loads, in his view, add insult to injury. He does not believe them. He is certain either that the loads can be broken up into smaller consignments, or that they can be carried by rail, or by sea, by any other means, in fact, except road transport. There may be a hundred reasons for congestion. The one that most clearly makes itself visible is the outsize load, and there seem to be too many people ready to believe that, if it were eliminated from the roads, congestion would be'no more.
From time to time, the bus comes under the same form of criticism. Its opponents affirmed, during the recent London strike, that its enforced absence had eased the traffic situation in central London. Subsequent official statements indicate that this did in fact happen, although at the same time the number of accidents increased. The somewhat hastily drawn conclusion in some quarters was that the bus ought to be barred from central London, and the opportunity was also taken on some occasions to add a malediction against the large goods vehicle.
The Point Missed
If oversize vehicles were no longer allowed on the roads, the argument continues, there would be more room for everybody else, and passengers and goods would be painlessly transferred to the railways, who (heaven knows!) badly need them. What the argument forgets is that a better solution of the problem would be to speed up the construction of an adequate road system.
Recently, the heavy haulage operator has shown more inclination than hitherto to reply to the growing number of attacks made upon him. If there has been some change of policy, however late in the day, it is a sensible one. The heavy haulier has for too long followed the advice of the old Persian proverb: "The dogs bark, but the caravan passes on."
An unexpected blow has been the proposal by the Ministry of Transport to exclude abnormal, indivisible loads from motorways. The heavy hauliers have consistently understood, even if they have not had a specific assurance, that motorways would solve many of their routeing problems.
In his long-sustainedprelude to the motorways that are still to come, the Minister of Transport has more than once made the point, or appeared to make the point, that their primary purpose is to help the commercial and industrial life of the country, by providing the means for swifter transport between the main centres of population. The heavy hauliers would maintain that their activities are at least as important as those of any other branch of commercial road transport, and as important also as those of the armed forces, who are being given a dispensation to permit their outsize vehicles to travel on the motorways.
Another method devised by the Ministry to teduce the volume of abnormal traffic on the roads is to advise the Chamber of Shipping whenever a movement is proposed that could be carried out by sea. At this stage, at any rate, there is no question of compulsion. The Ministry admit that there may be difficulties, such as the lack of suitable or available ships, or cranes, as well as possible differences in the proposed charges. Nevertheless, the shipping companies must find it helpful to have the earliest possible notice of a heavy load that has to be moved; and the manufacturers must feel that, if what they receive from the Ministry is not a command, it is a strong recommendation.
Unofficial Regulation
The understanding between the Ministry and the manufacturers may prove just as effective as the abortive proposals put forward by the Ministry towards the end of 1955. It was suggested then that a special Order from the Minister, previously obligatory only where the weight of the load and the carrying vehicle exceeded 150 tons, or the combined width exceeded 20 ft., should in future be required where the load exceeded 125 tons gross weight or 18 ft. overall width, or where the overall length of the load and carrying vehicle was more than 80 ft. Several other new or more onerous restrictions were proposed.
For once, a formidable defence of the abnormal, indivisible load was organized. The Road Haulage Association called a meeting attended by members of their own heavy haulage group, and by representatives of manufacturers, contractors, builders, road makers, vehicle manufacturers and British Road Services. The strong and united protest that came from the meeting was presumably one of the main reasons why the Ministry have not so far put their proposals into practice, although their more recent advice to manufacturers and to shipping companies may ultimately have very much the same effect.
What remains of permanent interest in the 1955 proposals is the preamble. "The aspect of the matter which has come to the fore in recent years," said the Ministry, was the congestion and delay to other road users caused by the movement of abnormal, indivisible loads. There was a widespread feeling, the statement continued, "which has found expression both inside and outside Parliament, that the movement of bulky and heavy loads by road is relatively S.o easy and so cheap that many consignors do not ask themselves whether, in the interests of other road users, they could without undue expense use rail (or occasionally sea) transport as an alternative, or whether the load. to be moved could be reduced in size and weight for transport purposes by simple dismantling or by redesigning or by some change in the arrangements for reassembly at the destination."
The hint is plain enough. Public opinion, which the Minister of Transport cities not necessarily share, inereasingly calls for some curb on the increasing number of outsize loads being moved by road_ Unless the opposite point of view can be given adequate expression, he may feel bound to take some action, such as banning all abnormal loads from motorways, however this may conflict with his previous intentions.