Discuss Serpell rationally
Page 22
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
CM's book review of Heavy Truck (January 1) was opposite in view to the public and political reaction to the Serpell Report on British Rail.
As your reviewer said of the arguments put forward to the author, Chris Park: the story of overland transport would have been very different if the men of vision had thought along more rational lines and financed road building. The costly and wildly inefficient railway era need never have been. The nation that invented railways, and willed the construction of so many miles of unprofitable track, needed them least, if at all.
In newspapers and on TV, politicians argue that after the Beeching axe fell on BR, coach services, serving rural communities instead of rail fell off. I wonder why? Could it be that the much smaller subsidies needed from politicians (via the taxpayers) were not provided?
Another fallacious argument: don't close any rail lines, otherwise the roads will be overcrowded and we can't afford better roads. So if BR retains its present network, I foresee more pressure to reduce (reduce!) road expenditure.
The most telling point never put forward against any reduction in rail network, as against keeping inter-city and heavily trafficked commuter services is in our need to support our road transport industry (subsidised in the case of BL; taking some of the brunt off unemployment in the case of private carriers).
Naturally, subsidised BL is keeping a low profile — but what is their contribution to overseas earnings (one thing GB Ltd can't cut without going bankrupt): is it £500m or £1,000m? I forget, but the importance stands, even admitting that fewer rail services would suck in some foreign coach imports. The EEC would stop us giving subsidies solely to British-vehicle-only fleets; unless we paid a French bureaucrat to show us a way round that one.
What are rail exports worth as against road vehicles?
I am not exactly anti rail; the network is there, it has a fine safety record. What I am anti is the current emotionalism and hysteria that prevents intelligent debate of the various Serpell options.
Options are what he was asked for. Now that we have them, rail unions and most Labour and Tory politicians (SDP is keeping quiet again) are saying throw this report in the rubbish bin. Sir Peter Parker is an honourable exception. In the current climate I expect that will he held against him, but not by me.
REG PARKER London N4