OPINIONS and QUERIES
Page 47
Page 48
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Is Haulage Legislation Inevitable? Unfairness Alleged in Goodsvehicle Taxation. Royal Show Organizer Encourages Bus Operators
Another Haulier's Opinion on the Proposed Legislation.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[40631 Sir,—The road haulage industry is to-day.at the cross-roads. It must adjust itself to conditions which will make it a more-stabilized business, and one that is run on sound economic lines, or it will be legislated out of existence.
At the moment we have the Road and Rail Traffic Bill, the first part of legislation on which we are to base our business, and we may be sure that if this legislation does not effect the cure required then we shall get something far more serious.
Now let us see what it means; obviously, the intention underlying the Bill is to make sure that all hauliers come under review by the Traffic Commissioners. Previously they have not been so reviewed, but have been free to operate in their own fashion, and probably this latter state would have continued but for the abuse it received. We have fought one with another, and as a result conditions of working and rates leave nothing to be proud of ; a fact which cannot be denied.
Legislation of some kind seems the only cure now, but how are we going to approach this legislative effort? Are we going to try to have the Bill amended to such a form as will be a benefit to our industry, or Is it so fashioned that it will be a benefit to the railways and a danger to the road haulier? I submit that we should approach this sul5ject in a constructive spirit and we should press for amendments as a body with a 'common policy which would ensure that the Bill assists the industry only as regards safety of the roads and proper conditions of employment.
Such clauses as are contained in the Bill to allow the railways to oppose applications of licences on the grounds that they provide existing facilities, should come out. The haulier should not be compelled to apply for a renewal of his licence every two years, or at any time ; he should enjoy a sense of security the same as in any other industry, provided he has conducted his business with due regard to reasonable conditions of operation, as previously mentioned. Any other condition is unthinkable. It would be equivalent to an official entering a grocer's shop and telling him that he must cease business because another grocer is selling goods similar to his.
The suggestion of route or area licensing in the Bill is impracticable and would destroy the flexibility which is the value of road transport. The licensing should be on a general basis, and the haulier should be free to conduct his business wherever he wishes to.
As regards the Budget, I can only say that as it is proved that we, as an industry, pay more than our share of the cost of the roads, then the penal taxation proposed is a tax on transport, it thus seems that even the Chancellor is not able to withstand the influence exerted by the railways. In principle, the tax on road transport is a tax on one section of an industry for the benefit of another, and I consider it most improper that the taxation weapon should be used for this purpose. It is surely equivalent to taxing electrical undertakings at the behest of the gas companies, an entirely new principle and a dangerous precedent.
The industry of road transport has been built up in the past 14 years, and surely it must be agreed that to bring employment to between 800,000 and 900,000 persons in such a short time is a marvellous achievement. Can the country at this time afford to glance onesidedly at such an industry, and, moreover, are we to allow such a position? I suggest that the only solution is co-operation to the fullest possible extent.
J. F. B. PYE, Chairman-Metropolis, The Road Haulage Association. London, S.E.16.
Unjust Differences between Passenger and Goods Vehicle Taxation.
The Editor, 'inn COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[4064] Sir,—rt is possible that you may not have noticed to what extent the proposed additional taxation of goods vehicles, contained in the Budget, is Illogical and unjust when comparison is made with the taxation of passenger-carrying vehicles.
I have consequently drawn out a memorandum [We reproduce this.—E.1 setting out a comparison in the ease of vehicles weighing unladen approximately the same, from which it will be seen that, although the weights are very similar, the goods vehicle is taxed 44 per cent. more than the passenger type and is restricted to 20 m.p.h., as against the passenger vehicle speed of 30 m.p.h.
Memorandum on Vehicle Taxation.
Consider a 48-seater bus weighing 6 tons 12 cwt. unladen, or say 8 tons 2 cwt., on an average, laden. The average annual mileage of such a vehicle is about 50,000. It is taxed with licence duty at £77, and petrol tax at 8d. per gallon, which works out at a payment of £256 per annum (consumption, say, 6i m.p.g.). The combined tax works out at 1.6d. per mile run.
A goods vehicle with a van body of about the same size and capacity on pneumatic tyres weighing, say, 6 tons 5 cwt. unladen will carry on an average 3 tons, making a total laden weight of 9 tons 5 cwt. It is to be taxed, under the Budget proposals, with licence duty at £110 and petrol tax which, if it runs 30,000 miles a year (doing 5/m.p.g.) will amount to £200. Total tax £310 or 2.48d. per mile.
As a matter of principle taxation should be similar for all vehicles of similar weight travelling on the highway, provided that the speeds are the same. The B.29 passenger vehicle is allowed to travel at 30 m.p.h. but the goods type at only 20 m.p.h. Whereas the difference in the weights passing over the road in the two cases is less than 10 per cent, the goods model is taxed some 44 per cent, more than a passenger vehicle and restricted to a lower speed. This is definitely illogical taxation and unjust to goods vehicles.
Bradford. E. E. HUTCHINBON, Director (For Ryburn United Transport, Ltd.).
Excursion to the Royal Show at Derby.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[4065] Sir,—Executives of the transport companies will probably be glad to have a timely reminder that the Royal Agricultural Society's Show is this year being held at Derby from July 4 to 8, both days inclusive. The King and Queen are to visit the Show on the second day, Wednesday, July 5.
I have found in previous years that the best method of bringing the attractions of the Show before the travelling public is to write to the Secretary, Royal Agricultural Society, 16, Bedford Square, W.C.2, who has been most helpful in supplying me with placards and posters showing the many attractions among the exhibits, as well as the spectacular appeal and timetable of each day's events in the ring.
The Society gives an excellent inducement to bus owners by providing, free, a coach park adjoining the Show grounds. A letter to the local Secretary of the National Farmers' Union, for submission to his members, is the best way to test the possibilities of running such an excursion, whilst an advertisement in the local paper will create interest and lead to inquiries from local farmers.
The attraction of the Show is not restricted to the agriculturist, the inherent love of stock is in the hearts of the majority of Englishmen, whilst the wide display of trade exhibits and the spectacular side of the Show make a potentially large public for any bus owner who has the enterprise to plan excursions to The Royal.
Marlow. R.A.S.E, Fun.
The New Duty on Heavy Oils, The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[4066] Sir,—You are, of course, aware that the Government has levied a duty of Id. per gallon on heaVy hydrocarbon oils.
We, members of the oil-burner industry, feel that the levying of this duty on a gallonage basis is unjust, as it imposes a very heavy burden in the form of additional direct taxation on our clients, who are users of fuel oil; it may also have a crippling effect on the oil burner and oil furnace industries.
Fuel oil at the present time is sold at from 50s. to 80s. per ton of approximately 245 gallons. The tax of id. per gallon is equal to 11 Os. 5d. per ton, and therefore represents an average increase in price of 35 per cent. to the consumer. Lubricating oil, on the other hand, is sold at approximately 4s. per gallon and a tax of id. per gallon in this case is equal to only 2 per cent.
We claim that fuel oil is not a direct competitor with coal, but is used principally in industries where the use of coal is technically unsound. These remarks particularly apply to the glass and metallurgical industries. Fuel oil is used for central heating and, to a very small extent, for steam-raising purposes for reasons of cleanliness, accurate temperature control, saving in space, elimination of smoke, etc.
Many of our clients who have had the courage and enterprise to install modern oil-firing equipment will be unable to revert to solid fuel without considerable structural alterations to their buildings or factories, and we feel that it is very unjust that they should be penalized by the imposition of this tax.
The oil burner and oil-furnace manufacturer of this country pay in wages the sum of approximately 1200,000 per annum. This figure does not take into consideration any indirect labour used in the construction B30 of oil storage tanks, electrical apparatus, etc. We also feel that it is a very short-sighted policy to impose a tax that may cripple this new and promising industry and throw out of employment some thousands of those engaged in the industry.
We are actively engaged in endeavouring to obtain some remission of this tax, and we ask you to assist us in this object. W. A. HUBBARD, Manager London, E.C.4. (For Combustions, Ltd.).
Extra Pay-load Permitted by Aluminium-alloy Bodies.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[4067] Sir,—Having observed in your recent reply to the correspondent requiring information as to the best type of vehicle for transporting 100 tons per day a distance of 360 miles, that you recommend the use of van bodies built of aluminium alloys, we shall be very much obliged if you will kindly forward the enclosed letter and publicity matter to your correspondent and we thank you for your suggestion.
Even on a plain platform to carry 12 tons—which we can effect legally—a ton is saved by Duramin construction, which would mean eight vehicles instead of nine on the daily haul and the saving of the capital outlay for three of the chassis you estimate as required to carry through the contract efficiently.
This in itself will more than pay for the extra cost of Duramin bodies, and the saving in operating costs is all clear profit.
It is in the operation of such a contract that altiminium-alloy bodies show their astounding value. D. M. PROCTOR, Sales Manager (For The Duramin Engineering (Jo., Ltd.).
• London, N.W.10.
A Question of Holding a Vehicle for Debt.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR,
[4068] Sir,—We shall be pleased if you will advise us on the following matter. We have a client who garages his motor lorry with us, also drawing supplies, petrol, oil, etc. Our terms are monthly settlement. This man paid part of his account every month, leaving a little unpaid, until at last he is in arrears to the amount of about 123.
We had to ask him to pay his account up to date, he said that he could not do this, and informed us that if we stop his supplies he would have to go to another garage and pay us when he can. He is buying his lorry on tile hire-purchase system.
Are we in order if we hold his lorry in our garage until the account is settled? If we allow him to move, we have very little hope of getting our money.
Bournemouth. GARAGE.
[In this particular case the lorry is under a hire-purchase agreement and is, therefore, the property of the renters. The suppliers are not entitled to hold the lorry until the account due from the hirer is paid. The only remedy appears to be for the suppliers to issue a default summons for goods supplied. The meaning of a default summons is that judgment is entered at the expiration of eight days from the service of the summons, provided that no defence is filed.—ED.] Registering a Business Name.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
1-406O1 Sir,—I should be pleased if you could let me have your advice on the following :—For several years my father, who has recently died, has been running a small carting business. Now my mother and I propose to continue the business, trading in his name. Shall we have to register under the Business Names Act? If so, what is the cost, and where do we have to
register? F.C. Norwich.
[It would be advisable for you to register under the Businers Names Act. The cost is 58., and you should apply to the Registrar of Business Names, Princes House, 37, Kingsway, London, W.C.2.—S.T.R.]