1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180 
Suspect — But Successful
Page 64
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
CRITICISM by Sir Sydney Littlewood, vice-president %..../of the Law Society, of the Government's failure to place tribunal inspectors under the control of the Lord Chancellor, as recommended by the Franks Committee, will not arouse strong sentiments among road passenger transport operators. Sir Sydney said last week that many responsible people believed that an inspector could not be relied upon to express an independent opinion so long as he had to report to the Minister who controlled him.
He suggested that an inspector would be placed in an embarrassing position if his recommendations were publicly dismissed by the Minister and would naturally wish to avoid such a situation at all costs. This possibility would be avoided if the inspector were under the control of the Lord Chancellor.
In passenger transpOrt appeals, the Minister frequently disagrees with the recommendations of his inspectors on points of both detail and principle. In doing so, he implies no censure on their ability or judgment, and no embarrassment is apparent. Admittedly, his decisions are not published in the sense of being placed on public record, but copies of them are sent to the Press and are available for perusal at the Ministry.
Doubt has been expressed about the wisdom of allowing the Minister, who is responsible to Parliament for nationalized transport agencies with conflicting aims and claims, to adjudicate in coach and bus appeals, but not for the reasons given by Sir Sydney Littlewood. There has never been any suggestion that the Minister would try to influence his inspectors' recommendations, which are based on the facts of each case.
To all appearances the whole system of conducting appeals in road passenger transport is suspect, but the curious thing is that it has worked with general satisfaction for nearly 30 years. It is one of those illogical British institutions that yield results.