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 
Change of Name
Page 106
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
SOMETIMES, at least, notice is taken of what I say, and usually in circumstances when such an effect is not expected. Not long ago I suggested that the mixed collection of organizations that had banded together to solve the transport problem for the Government (worthy though their individual causes might be), with aims and objects beyond reproach, had chosen a somewhat misleading title. On a body calling themselves the National Standing Joint Council on Road and Rail Traffic Problems one might just be prepared to accept the presence of representatives of such interests as hikers, cyclists, youth hostels and friends of the Lake District. It was more difficult to understand why the main providers and users of transport, and especially road transport, were not represented at all.
The mere hint was enough. The organizations concerned could hardly have made amends more rapidly. Within a matter of days rather than weeks,'they had agreed to change the name of the new body and to call themselves the National Cauncil on Inland Transport. This naturally puts the whole thing in a different light! At the same time, we have had made known to us the names and: attributes of the leading officials. The honorary secretary represents pedestrians, the honorary treasurer is concerned with noise abatement, and the vice-chairman speaks for the inland waterways. The chairman (no surprises here) is Lord Stonham.
AHANDSOME apology must be made for any suggestion that the old title was deliberately inflated to give the organizations More importance than perhaps they deserved. No less grandiose a description than National Council on Inland Transport could be given to a group of transport experts of the calibre indicated above, and there can be no doubt that their research and recommendations will amply justify the name they have taken. The new disposition of the old forces makes it more possible than before to see what they have in mind and how they propose to grapple with a problem that has defied Mr. Marples and Dr. Beeching, for which reason it is easy to understand why neither gentleman has been offered a seat on the council!
Without going too much into detail, the kind of suggestion we may expect is that all goods traffic beyond a certain distance should travel by river or canal, preferably On horse-drawn vessels to abate the . noise. Journeys over shorter distances, and collection and delivery, will be made on foot. By this simple expedient, the Government will at one stroke save the money now being wasted on building and maintaining roads, the railway lines can be beaten into ploughshares and the permanent way turned into the pilgrims' way.
•
IN these more enlightened days, the transition would not be so brutal as the liquidation of the stagecoach by the train over a century ago. Existing forms of transport would be superseded gradually, with the minimum of hardship. There would have to be adequate compensation for the railwaymen. As for the hauliers—but who cares about them? • .
Strange as it may seem, at least one important C licence holder is very much concerned that hauliers should prosper and increase as well as improve their service to trade and B36 industry. Mr. L. A. Castleton, chief transport officer, the Metal Box Co. Ltd., told members of the South Wales and Monmouthshire section of the Institute of Transport a few days ago that, in certain circumstances, the transport user ought to have a sense of responsibility towards the professional carrier, both by road and by rail. A constructive and objective approach. to transport selection was called for.
It was unfortunately true, said Mr. Castleton, that most people seemed to want to use transport how and when they pleased. They 'wanted the best service at the lowest cost, as well as the right to use their own vehicles when it suited them. In other words, they wanted to have their cake and eat it, and to continue enjoying their freedom of choice without regard to where that choice led.
WITH the rapid growth in the number of vehicles, and with the increased pressure on loading and unloading bays, users should consider carefully whether they ought to add to the number by expanding their fleets and also to what extent they could satisfactorily employ road haulage. The problem would obviously be affected by the nature and the size of the user's requirements. Mr. Castleton gave an example from one of the areas of his own company, which had accepted an obligation to limit its fleet to a modest size and to channel the major part of its demand for road transport to a group of hauliers, who were left to arrange distribution through their own resources. The resulting standard of service was very high.
Mr. Castleton was by no means suggesting that hauliers could provide the ideal answer to every transport problem. He gave other examples of occasions when hauliers had declined to provide a specialized service and had woken up to the possibilities too late, to find that the work was being done by vehicles on C licence. He was far from conceding that the trader should not operate medium or heavy vehicles in competition with professionals. On the Contrary; it was commonsense that the user should make the fullest use of the opportunity to run his own vehicles if this was the only way he could achieve the standard required in cost, convenience, service or anything else.
ON the other hand, if the carrier were required to provide certain additional capital equipment for only a limited period each year, possibly during the peak season, and for the rest of the year the user managed to meet his own requirements with his own vehicles, then the user must either accept an obligation to give a reasonable continuity of employment, or be prepared to pay heavily for the service he was demanding.
Mr. Castleton's position and his wide transport experience lend importance to his thought-provoking paper. Perhaps for the first time, it puts in words sentiments with which there will be wide agreement, although possibly not among the ranks of the National Council on Inland Transport. In their newly acquired spirit of reasonableness, however, they might even be prepared, if he applied for membership, to overlook the disability that he actually is qualified to speak with authority on transport. Once this hurdle had been overcome, all he would need to do would be to get rid of his C licence fleet and buy a stout pair of walking shoes.