Paolug at cato...
Page 37
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I read with great interest your item on running costs (CM, December 3).
The first point I should like to make concerns running costs through which the haulier has to recover any outlayed costs, and on top of that, make enough to purchase any new vehicles.
But the point is, how can anyone in the private sector of the road haulage industry pass on extra costs without being blamed for causing a rise in the cost of living. Instead, he is expected to absorb any costs to him.
I have also read that North Eastern British Road Services has just obtained a contract with the Steel Corporation at its new Scunthorpe plant, which will mean an increase in the NEBRS fleet of 15 vehicles.
This adds more pressure to the private sector because, at their ridiculous costs, all BRS has to do is ask for a blank cheque at the end of the year to cover its losses, whereas in the private sector would be forced into bankruptcy.
I do not wish to sleight any BRS driver, but I do criticise the management for such a shoddy job of management, and such items of deliveries and delivery dates which they seem to get away with. In the private sector one has to put up with all sorts of complaints, and offer as near as possible a first-class service.
My second point relates to your article on the psv sector (nationalised). I should like to know how, when they keep saying they cannot afford to run a proper passenger service, London Transport can afford to replace, at a cost of £20 million, a fleet of 660 buses. I suppose it means one more blank cheque and more expensive bus fares.
Having said this, I think it is about time more of us backed the Member of Parliament for Eastbourne, Ian Gow, in his denationalisation bill just as soon as possible.
A. C. BUCKMAN,
Coldwaltham, Sussex