AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Rule by Steam-hammer

12th October 1956
Page 41
Page 41, 12th October 1956 — Rule by Steam-hammer
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Lebanese Government Ban Oilers Because Operators Do Not Maintain Them Properly

WHAT has happened in Lebanon could n o t occur in Britain, but it stands as a warning to operators all over the world. It is also an outstanding example of muddle-headed action by a government in dealing with a petty annoyance.

The Lebanese Government have banned the import of oil engines and oil-engined vehicles, except for those destined for transit to other countries. The effect is that oilers are confined to certain routes, such as from Beirut to Damascus or Jordan.

This is a serious blow to British trade, but is no less damaging to the internal economy of Lebanon. Oil-engirted vehicles have become extremely popular in the country. The Lebanese like the external appearance of American vehicles, but not their petrol engines. Consequently, operators in Lebanon have either bought British vehicles with oil engines already installed, or have purchased American vehicles and replaced the petrol engines by British compression-ignition units.

German Success Recently, a German manufacturer has made inroads into the market, particularly with an oilengined taxicab, which has shown great economy when compared with American petrol-engined cars. Moreover, taxis are widely used for journeys to the hill stations over roads which do not permit high speed, and the torque characteristics of the oil engine are ideally suited to the work.

At a stroke of the pen, all these benefits have been cancelled and transport operators have been compelled to return to petrol engines. There are two possible reasons for this action.

A belief held among British industrialists is that a power group of American interests has forced the ban on the government to protect United States trade. The official explanation is that, because of neglect in maintenance, oil-engined vehicles emit dense clouds of black smoke and that the public have come to regard it as deleterious to health.

Nobody who knows the country will deny that vehicles are badly maintained or that they belch out clouds of smoke. The remedy is not, however, to deprive the people of the benefits of economic transport, but to compel the offending operators to run their vehicles efficiently.

As for danger to health, that bubble should by now have been burst. Seven years' research by two eminent British authorities, Dr. Richard Doll and Prof. Bradford Hill, has produced no evidence to suggest a connection between oil-engine smoke and lung cancer. Their conclusions agree with those of others, including American research workers Conclusive Evidence If that evidence is not regarded as sufficient, it is necessary only to turn to the interim report of the group for research on atmospheric pollution of the Medical Research Council, Exhaustive tests with London buses have revealed little, if any, 3 : 4 benzpyrene, 'a cancer-causing substance, in the exhaust fumes and certainly less than in coal smoke. The experiments are continuing, but are unlikely to produce unfavourable results If the official explanation is true, Lebanese operators have cut their own throats. Dilatory operators in other parts of the world should take heed lest they suffer a similar fate. There is no excuse for poor maintenance, because British manufacturers provide, at great expense to themselves, courses of instruction for users' staffs. If operators neglect to take advantage of those facilities and cause a public nuisance, they must expect to have restrictions placed on them.

But only the most obtuse Administration would seek to cure an avoidable nuisance by prohibiting even the proper use of an engine capable of causing it. One might equally well ban public concerts because performers sometimes offend the ears of listeners.

British interests in Lebanon are trying to organize a campaign to secure the repeal of the embargo. Unfortunately, their customers, who stand to gain most by the success of the campaign, appear to be their greatest enemies.


comments powered by Disqus