No Halfway House
Page 41
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
DISCUSSION on the pros and cons of denationalization proceeds apace, as if a Conservative victory in the General Election were a foregone conclusion. The preparation of plans at this juncture is not as preposterous as it may seem. No change in the present transport system will follOw a Socialist victory, and it is natural that speculation should % run mainly on the lines that promise to lead to a different system.
The Road Haulage Association has already announced agreement upon a. plan by its national council. The Association has good reason for not issuing details of the plan for the time being. As the only one in the field, it would be the target of every person or party that disagreed with it. In spite of the most categorical denials, it would be treated as the Conservatives' plan, and the Tories would be put in the disadvantageous position of having either to disown it or to defend proposals with all of which they might not be in complete agreement.
The critics of nationalized transport are by no means unanimous on the steps that should be taken to put matters right. Suggestions ' range from leaving things as they are to the abolition of the Ivory Tower and all its works. Even within the R.H.A., there are wide differences of opinion. When it is eventually published, it will certainly be found that the Association's official plan provides for the return of the whole of the Road Haulage Executive to free enterprise. Not all the members favour so radical a reversal. One R.H.A. area has gone on record as suggesting that denationalization Should apply only to those ex-hauliers who want to buy their businesses back. .
Limited denationalization on these lines appears to be the Conservative policy, so far as may be read between the lines of the somewhat cryptic and guarded official statements on the subject. It represents the final phase of the praiseworthy campaign to make amends to the dispossessed hauliers.
Taken for Granted Abolition of the 25-mile limit and the licensing of State-owned road vehicles are so fundamental a part of denationalization that they are almost taken for granted. The R.H.A. and most of its splinter groups, as well as the Conservatives, are at one on these points. They were embodied in the Transport (Amendment) Bill, the main purpose of which was to remove or mitigate provisions in the Transport Act unfairly limiting the haulier and not the R.H.E. The reinstatement of ex-hauliers who so desired would carry the process of restitution as far as it could go.
Once the Tories have turned the tables on their opponents and hold a secure Parliamentary majority, they have no need to keep their policy within the bounds set by the Transport Act and to content themselves with pointing out where the shoe pinches particularly tightly. The payment to the haulier of his just dues can be set-within a wider scheme for the reform of the transport system as a whole. In planning to this end, the Tories must keep in mind the welfare not only of the haulier, but also of trade and industry and, of course, of the British Transport Commission.
The Transport (Amendment) Bill proposed to extend the haulier's permitted radius from 25 to 60 miles. His supporters stressed that this concession would mean a
good deal to him and would still leave a wide field in which the B.T.C. would retain its monopoly. If a Conservative Government follows the General Election. the mileage restriction would be abolished and the B.T.C. would have no monopoly.
Long-distance road haulage was nationalized and insulated against competition so that the Commission would be able to proceed undisturbed with the planning and execution of integration. "Integrate or perish " might well have been inscribed over the gateway of the Ivory Tower. It followed almost logically that the Commission would need artificial protection against the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. Hot-house integration of the kind envisaged in the Transport Act would be unable to withstand the cold blast of free enterprise.
It is for this reason that attacks have been so persistently directed against the C-licence holder. Only a short time ago, the president of the National Union of Railwaymen, Mr. H. W. Franklin, summed up the situation naively, but accurately within his terms of reference, when he said: "If State industry is to be the success we hope, it has to be a monopoly. Without that monopoly, nationalized integration cannot be achieved and no justification remains for retaining a section of the road haulage industry under State ownership."
Wishing to Come Back
One or two critics have already pointed out that the proposal for partial denationalization of road haulage may easily mean that ex-hauliers wishing to come back into the industry would take their pick Of vehicles and traffic and leave the R.H.E. a very sorry rump indeed. There is no point in a denuded R.H.E. with no special advantages over its competitors. If it cannot succeed under the present favourable conditions, it will have even less chance when other operators are freed from their handicaps.
An important motive guiding hauliers who wish to see the R.H.E. kept in being is that it will not be so strong a competitor as the businesses it took over. A conjoined fear is that some outside interest will make an offer for the R.H.E., or a large part of it, and thus set up a road transport empire greater than has ever been known in this country. The Conservatives are aware of this difficulty, and realize that the formation Of a giant transport concern would make it easier for the Socialists to re-nationalize if they ever have the opportunity.
The continued existence even of a truncated R.H.E. will provide an even better basis for re-nationalization. The fact that, in spite of this, many hauliers would prefer to see the R.H.E. kept in being is the strongest argument for its abolition. The Conservatives want to give the country the best possible transport system. They would presumably even adopt nationalization if it appeared to be the right solution. They already have as much evidence as they need to the contrary.
There can be no halfway house in denationalization. The Conservatives and the hauliers, with the support and advice of trade and industry (and, of course, by kind permission of the electorate) must first aim to bring the whole of road transport under private ownership. Its future, including its relations with the .B.T.C., can then be planned as a whole.