1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196 
LOOKING AT LICENSING with lain Sherriff
Page 67
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The LA's new role
• When the Minister of Transport announced her proposals in July 1967 for the future of carriers' licences, those connected with the industry immediately set about making everyone aware of the implications.' The danger to the established long-distance operator, the increased cost, the possibility of back door nationalization were all highlighted.
Since July 1967 there have been campaigns, rallies, lobbies and petitions but surely by now it is clear that until there is a change of government the road haulage industry.is fighting a rearguard action. In this fight the "enemy" will suffer casualties but at the end of the day, and this could be January 1 next year, 11 months hence, much of what is now proposed will be law. Are you ready to live with it, as live with it you must?
Despite the efforts of professional and trade associations, politicians and the Press, few who will earn their living under the terms of the Act which will emerge from the Transport Bill have begun to understand it in detail. Indeed, from a survey I recently carried out, not one in 200 hauliers has even seen the Bill. This total reliance on the efforts of elected or employed representation is at one and the same time touching and dangerous. Without exception, all know that it will cost more to operate their vehicles —unless they become considerably more efficient, of course. All know that to carry goods for more than 100 miles on an over-I6-ton-g.v.w. outfit they may have to prove that they can do it better than British Railways. Beyond these points their knowledge is extremely limited.
This Bill, all 260 pages, 169 clauses and 11 parts of it, merits the closest attention of all who will be affected by it. Parts V, VI and VII are of more domestic concern to goods transport than the rest. These parts deal with the regulation of the carriage of goods by road, charges for heavy goods vehicles and drivers' hours. This is the stuff which every transport man must know.
• In particular, part V deals with the duties of the Licensing Authority, operators' licences, special authorizations and enforcements.
Whether or not the Bill becomes law, one thing remains constant—the Licensing Authority. There is no suggestion in the Bill that traffic areas should change and there will be little change in the LA's general function. He will be issuing operators' licences and special authorizations, instead of carriers' licences; he will continue to conduct public inquiries; and he will issue transport managers' licences.
This much at least the established opera
tor will understand, and there is little in these arrangements which could be criticized. Ex cept perhaps that the Minister appears to have failed to recognize that while the duties of the chairman of the Traffic Commissioners must diminish under the proposed terms of the Act, his duties as LA will increase. Why then should she continue to talk in separate terms of the "chairman of the Traffic Commissioners" and the "Licensing Authority"? Some streamlining could have been done here.
In clause 56 the Minister prohibits the use of goods vehicles without an appropriate operator's licence, i.e. carrier's licence. This operator's licence will be required if you wish to carry goods for hire or reward or for, or in connection with your trade or business.
Two groups of vehicles are excepted, those under 30cwt unladen weight and those specified in regulations, but not yet known. To all intents and purposes, today's A, B and C licence holders operating vehicles over 30 cwt unladen will require an operator's licence which may specify whether goods may be carried on own account or for reward. Surely here again the promised sweeping away of an outdated law has failed to materialize. Vehicles are operated for hire or reward today on A and B licences, and for ancillary purposes on a C licence. The Bill perpetuates this position, when it distinguishes between carrying for hire or reward and own account.
I fail to see the need for this distinction, especially since the LA has the power to limit the use of a vehicle, by putting a condition on the licence. It has been suggested that a goods vehicle might be used on the road for other than the carriage of goods. It is, I suggest, inconceivable that any such vehicle would be in excess of 30 cwt u.l.w.
This opinion gains weight from the declaration that the functions of a local authority constitute the carrying on of a business. So that refuse collection vehicles, lighting tower wagons, cesspool emptiers and the like will all be classed as goods carrying vehicles.
However, what of the exceptions to clause 56—the under 30clvt u.l.w. vehicles? How the air freight c. and d. operators must be wishing that this had happened 10 years ago. They must now be concerned for the future; each new application for this type of traffic draws a fair quota of objections at the moment, but when the Bill becomes law, the floodgates will open—and not only for air freight traffic. With packing becoming lighter, in densely populated areas this freedom will give scope to the local carrier who is prepared to take a little less profit per ton-mile. This is an area where there will almost certainly be a new type of operator overnight.
The Minister might have been better advised to confine this freedom to the own
account operator. Certainly the liberalization does not relieve the administration to any great extent—and nothing like so great as that implied by the Ministry when it talks of releasing 900,000 vehicles from the need for any type of licence. Most were granted automatically on C.
In terms of clause 56 it is only necessary to have an operator's licence if the vehicle is to be used to carry goods on the road. This exempts vehicles which run empty to and from construction sites and are then used to shift topsoil on the site. After a heavy day's work these vehicles are used on the road to take the driver home. Even worse, many of those who are prepared to tackle this type of work are often hundreds of miles from home and make the journey every weekend. They will need no licence to use the vehicle on the road for these journeys but this, I fear, is only a short step away from piratical operation; it might have been wiser to drop "on the road" and extend the exempted vehicles list.
Summarizing clauses 55 and 56:—
If you wish to operate a goods vehicle in excess of 30 cwt. u.l.w. on the road for the carriage of goods, you will require to obtain an operator's licence from the Licensing Authority. This also applies td local authorities.