Lord Lucas of La Mancha
Page 41
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Political Commentary By JAN US IF the defence put up by Lord Lucas against the Transport (Amendment) Bill be the best that the Socialists can muster, there should be no difficulty in the Opposition winning all the verbal honours in the House of Commons, although it may be out-voted on a division. The Government may, of course, regard the Noble Lord as expendable, an Aunt Sally or decoy duck set up merely to draw the enemy's fire.
His argument ran something like this : The British Transport Commission has been "forced by statute" to acquire 2,700 road haulage undertakings operating 40,000 vehicles; and to pay (when it gets around to it) t:70m. in compensation. This money has been trustfully donated by the taxpayer, who has been given in exchange a long-distance road haulage monopoly. The new Bill will destroy this monopoly, and the poor taxpayer will have paid £70m. for nothing.
Lord Lucas of Chilworth might more appropriately have located his peerage in La Mancha. Another Don Quixote, he tries to live out some obscure dream of his own, and goes tilting at windmills and motorcyclists with little regard for reality. His Dulcinea is the taxpayer, who must be as disconcerted at finding this doughty champion as was the Spanish lady when she heard of the deeds the earlier Don Quixote was perpetrating in her name. .
According to Cervantes, the friends of the Knight of the Woeful Countenance did not waste time in arguing with him. They burned his bodks and put him to bed. As it is not practicable to follow their example in the 'present case, it may be as well to examine the statement by Lord Lucas, and to see what it amounts to.
Is the Commission entitled to claim that it has purchased a monopoly with the taxpayer's L70m.? If something is to be bought, it must be available for sale. Neither singly nor collectively did the undertakings now acquired have a monopoly.
No Monopoly The licensing system, it is true, protects any haulier from unnecessary competition where he is giving a satisfactory service. The system equally protects the British Transport Commission, in both the long-distance and the short-distance fields.
The taxpayer (or the Commission) has had good value for his money. Lord Lucas himself admits that 40,000 vehicles have been taken over. Other assets have been acquired, including garages, repair shops, loading banks, storage facilities and spares. These items must account for the better part of the £70m., and only a small proportion of them can be regarded as redundant.
The rest of the money has been paid—or, again as Lord Lucas points out, will be paid at some time or ;rnother—as compensation for pitchforking the former operators out of business. It is a salve to the taxpayer's conscience, and, strictly speaking, he should expect nothing in return. The term " goodwill " in this connection is misleading, but, to help Lord Lucas, let us not argue this point. Let us say that the transaction was really a normal one, and that the Commission took over and paid for a going concern, including the customers.
One may put it another way, and say that the Commission bought each undertaking's licence. This is what happens in practice when any haulage business changes hands, but the new owner does not usually claim the right to suppress other operators The Commission, it is true, has that right, and is exercising it without mercy; but it cannot be said that one penny of compensation has been paid tp purchase that right. It is given to the Commission free of charge.
Lord Lucas's argument recoils against him. If he really believes the Commission should have what it has paid for, he should condemn the new Bill for not going far enough. The Commission has bought vehicles and other assets, together with, let us say, the goodwill and the licences, Why should it not continue to hold the licences, and conform with the licensing procedure in other respects?
If it gave anything like a reasonable service, the Commission should find no difficulty in retaining the goodwill. It would be able to oppose in the licensing courts hauliers who sought to take its customers away. The enthusiastic monopolists such as Lord Lucas seem afraid that the moment the 25-mile limit is lifted to 60 miles, all the hauliers in the country will swarm across the barrier like prospectors staking their claim in a gold rush. Most hauliers want merely to be allowed to continue their business as in the past. They are not likely to start sending their vehicles all over the country lust for the fun of taking work from the Commission.
Break a Lance
Even if the Bill goes through, the Commission will still have the advantage outside the 60-mile radius, and will have paid nothing for it. Don Quixote, therefore, if he wishes to be consistent, should turn his horse around and engage his own side, breaking a lance on behalf of the haulier for a change.
He may find the Dulcinea of his present choice not a very rewarding mistress. The taxpayer, told by Lord Lucas that the benefits of his £70m. purchase are threatened, may ask rather rudely what those benefits are. To judge from the growing number of complaints, it appears as if the man who has paid the piper finds the tune is setting his teeth on edge.
It might have been interesting to know whether other Noble Lords on the.Govemment side agreed with the direction in which the eloquence of Don Quixote was taking him. As it was, they sat on their benches gazing in massive silence at the spectacle of the Knight of the Woeful Countenance spurring to the rescue of the taxpayer in distress.
Nothing became his speech so much as the ending of it. Just before sitting down, he said that the fuss made by the Opposition was about a very small section of the road haulage industry; the long-distance haulier had been acquired, the short-distance haulier was not concerned, and the carrier of excluded traffics was unrestricted.
Perhaps the Knight has sojourned a space with the Lord of the Ivory Tower, for this is doublethink of the choicest vintage. This terrible Bill, says Lord Lucas, poised to destroy the Commission, will merely affect a small minority of hauliers, and is therefore scarcely worth the time of the Opposition. With which sage paradox, the Knight of the Woeful Countenance wheels his steed and rides back to his castle in Spain.