Common Market Transport Experts Meet in London
Page 61
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE Common Market came to London on Monday and Tuesday when experts gathered at the Law Society to give papers at a conference entitled "The Legal Aspects of European Transport ". The purpose of the conference, which was jointly sponsored by the Federal Trust for Education and Research, the British Institute of International and Comparative Law and the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, was to describe the legal provisions and future plans of the European Economic Community relating to transport with special reference to the United Kingdom.
Delegates represented many wellknown public and commercial undertakings, lawyers and lecturers in transport and international law, and senior representatives of the Ministry of Transport, the Treasury Solicitor's Department and British Railways Board.
Opening the conference, Lord Hurcomb said that the Common Market had brought a number of problems which required urgent consideration in the United Kingdom by transport men, lawyers and commercial people generally.
Diversity of Systems Outlining the principles underlying the transport systems of Western European countries, with particular reference to international conventions, Mr. D. W. Glassborow, of the British Railways Board, said the first thing which struck him when looking at the systems of control in the " Six " and in this country was their diversity. This could be because no obviously best solution to control transport had yet been devised. Alternatively, the reason for the diversity may be that differences of geography and of economic development and structure had brought them about—that each system was the best for its own country.
Dealing with the standardization of maximum weights and dimensions of road vehicles, Mr. Glassborow said that if there was to be a single standard, such dimensions must, in logic, be the lowest of the individual countries maxima. There was necessarily a compromise in each country of existing standards. Maximum permitted widths, for instance, did not allow two such vehicles to pass everywhere on the road system. Vehicles of maximum length could not negotiate all bends without manteuvring, and maximum heights were too great for some tunnels and overbridges. Illustrating this point, Mr. Glassborow said that the increase in the maximum permitted axle loadings in the draft regulation recently announced in this country would increase by about one fifth on average the wear and tear on roads due to their use, rather than thatof vehicles of the present maximum permitted loads.
In conclusion, Mr. Glassborow said that it was perfectly sensible that govern
ments should regulate the internal transport systems of their countries. Transport was too important to leave to chance; but such control could hinder international transport with carriers having to conform to the, perhaps, conflicting regulations of two or more countries.
Mr. A. H. Reinarz, Director for Rates and Costs in the E.E.C. Commission's Transport Directorate next gave an analysis of the provisions of the Treaty and regulations affecting transport charges, with reference to the rules against discrimination and competition and the proposals for tariffication in the Commission's action programme on its draft transport policy, which evoked a lively discussion.
Mr. Reinarz said that the general idea was that rates proposals should emanate from the organizations of carriers. Customers—users of transport—would have a right to be heard on the subject. Generally speaking, carriers would have to make their propositions and the governments would have to assure themselves of the merits of those propositions. There would have to be some form of co-ordination on international rates, and the Commission would have to take upon itself the role of moderator.
Harmonization Problems Two interesting papers were given by two E.E.C. Commission experts. These dealt with the harmonization of investment and the allocation of infrastructure costs, harmonization in the technical field (including a European highway code), regulation for the construction and use of vehicles, equipment and compulsory insurance.
The experts were speaking under the chairmanship of Mr. G. D. Squibb, Q.C., president of the Transport Tribunal.
Mr. Heinrich Schulze, head of the Railroad Division, Directorate for Investment and Modernization of the Transport Directorate, said that a decision on whether there was to be a Channel tunnel or bridge would be particularly welcome.
Mr. G. Santoni-Rugiu, legal adviser to the Italian State Railways, dealt specifically with the question of a European highway code and construction and use regulations. Studies were in progress aimed at arriving at a more far-reaching unification of rules concerning traffic and bringing the present Convention up to date. Prevention of accidents was also being studied. The European Conference of Transport Ministers was trying to define in detail the principles which should govern the conduct of road users.
The question of unifying the technical characteristics of vehicles, particularly weights and size, was a problem which was receiving the most urgent consideration. It was clear that the bigger the vehicle and the bigger its loading capacity, the less was the chance of co-operation. The tendency to utilize vehicles of large capacity must be restricted by the needs of safety, of the smooth flow of traffic, and also by the cost of the upkeep of the roads. They had to examine whether it was better to have a larger number of vehicles of shorter length or to have a smaller number of vehicles with larger length.
• Various technical correlations between vehicle and trailer had induced some people to recommend the articulated vehicle, and others the road train—these points of view were influenced by 'the characteristics of vehicles which existed in the different countries at present. It was for these reasons, and many others, that the matter had to have preference. The Commission had made proposals concerning the harmonization of mini mum speeds; the minimum capacity of engines in relation to total weight; braking systems with regard to a particular vehicle or a train of vehicles; lighting and signs; tyres; the Use of provisions to reduce speed at points where accidents were frequent and the question of vehicle exhaust.
Advice Sought The Commission was being asked to advise also on the following questions: the minimum relation between engine capacity and total weight, the minimum relation between the axle and total weight; the minimum relation between the actual weight of the motor vehicle and trailer, and provisions with regard to manceuvrability of the vehicle at bends, and the overall maximum length.
Speaking on E.E.C. licensing policy, Dr. Gunther Krauss, Director for General Affairs in the E.E.C. Commission Transport Directorate, said that transport to and from non-member countries was at present regulated bilater: Hy in a wide variety of ways. The Commission did not propose that any change should be made in the early stages. In 1966, however, a procedure was to be introduced for joint consultation of bilateral agreements with the aim of procuring uniformity in the conditions contained in the agreements. As a preparatory step, information on the subject would be exchanged among member states from next year onwards. For the same purpose it was proposed that in their bilateral agreements with nonmember countries, member states should try to introduce clauses known as "E.E.C. Clauses" on the basis that such negotiations would be conducted with the Community.
Dr. Krauss concluded by remarking that greater freedom of road haulage might have been enjoyed if road transport had not, from, the beginning, been regarded, and in some cases was still regarded, as dangerous competition to the railways—a competition to be put under restraint.