The Long Way Round
Page 57
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
HUCKLEBERRY FINN and Tom Sawyer would have had no difficulty in helping their friend Jim to escape by breaking open the door of the hut in which he was kept prisoner. They preferred to dig a tunnel for him from outside, and spent so much time that in the end he failed to get away_ Very much the same method has been adopted for solving -the problem of increasing from 20 to 30 m.p.h. the speed limit on heavy goods vehicles.
Ever since the present limit was laid down 20 years ago there have been criticisms, and they have steadily gained in force. . Goods-vehicle manufacturers and operators submitted a joint memorandum to the Minister of Transport in 1944. In 1947, the Committee on Road Safety, on which the police and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents were represented, reported the opinion that there were no objections to an increase on the grounds of road safety.
Subsequently, representatives of transport users joined in, and there was even appointed a committee of trade, industry and vehicles manufacturers, under the chairmanship of Sir Leonard Browett. In the meantime, it became known that the Minister of Transport favoured raising the speed limit on heavy goods vehicles, and successive Ministers have concurred, irrespective of their political affiliations.
There were some objectors, including organizations representing the militant type of pedestrian. The trade unions did not approve wholeheartedly. They wanted safeguards to ensure that vehicles travelling at the proposed higher speeds were properly maintained and that the welfare of the drivers was not affected. Another point, introduced discreetly at first, was the growing resolve of the unions to use the increase in the speed limit as a bargaining counter for an increase in wages.
No Agreement
This single factor has more and more tended to overshadow the rest. At one stage, two or three years ago, it seemed almost certain that the Minister would shortly make the necessary order, but he finally decided that the moment was not opportune. The obvious reason was the failure of the employers and the workers to reach agreement on the running schedules that heavy goods vehicles would have to observe under the higher speed limit. It was equally obvious that the two sides could not agree about wages.
Perhaps in the course of time the hauliers and the trade unions will find a satisfactory formula, but the time is unlikely to be short. Their representatives on the National Joint Industrial Council met last month. According to their Press statement, they discussed the speed limit, and agreed that each side should discuss certain items further. In other words, they made no progress.
It is justifiable to wonder whether their discussions will ever come to an end. The higher speed limit will earn more Money for some operators, but others will hardly notice the difference financially. For these employers, a general increase in the wages of the drivers of heavy goods vehicles would be unfair. A rise for some drivers only would be unfairto the rest. The proposal of a bonus recommended by The Commercial Motor on April 1, is perhaps the most equitable, but the unions are unlikely to accept it. There remains one simple solution. The Minister of Transport can place before Parliament a Regulation, under Section 10 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, to increase the speed limit on heavy goods vehicles from 20 to 30 m.p.h. Such a step would take courage. After receiving so much deference for so long, the N.J.I.C., or at least the workers' side of • that body, would be indignant. There would be some talk of a strike, official or unofficial, as there was previously when the increase looked like becoming law.
The danger should not be minimized. In an attempt to meet it, the Browett committee have several times emphasized that the Regulation would be "permissive and not mandatory." In other words, nobody need drive faster unless he wants to. On this understanding, the committee feel it would be possible for employers and workers to negotiate on new operating schedules, and to agree on the appropriate financial benefits for the drivers. Such reasoning is unrealistic. Raising the limit will make an immediate difference, and the Government must be prepared for discontent at least among certain drivers.
Good Impression
Much depends upon the firmness with which the Government handle the situation. Although no recent survey appears to have been made, it is reasonably certain that all parties in the House of Commons are strongly in favour of raising the limit. A debate on the proposed Regulation might produce some opposition, but not on party lines. An overwhelmingly favourable vote would create a good impression on the public.
The workers would hesitate to act against the will of Parliament particularly if it were expressed in so decided a form. The debate would provide opportunities on both sides of the House for suggesting that the interests affected by the Regulation should get together as soon as possible and reach agreement. Experience gained from the operation of the higher limit should make agreement easier, for hauliers and their employees would be able to submit exact evidence of the practical effect.
Obviously, nothing can be done until after the General Election_ The situation when the successful party takes office will be almost ideal for the purpose. A new Government can run the risk of unpopularity, knowing that they have several years in which to rehabilitate themselves. So early in the day, the Opposition may not be seeking a pretext for attacking the Government.
When the proposal to raise the limit first became articulate was the time for making the move with the minimum of discontent. The situation should not have been allowed to deteriorate until the decision is left in the hands of a body representing only one section of the interests concerned. All the time it has been in the power of the Government to take the relatively simple step required. The delay has only made it harder to act, although practically every other country now has a higher speed limit for heavy goods vehicles than has Great Britain. Unless the necessary legislation is passed soon, the supporters of the increase will become discouraged and turn their energies to more amenable pursuits. It is fairly certain alto that agreement will not be reached on the N.J.I.C. this side of the long overdue Regulation.