Taking the long view . .
Page 66
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Janus comments•
Taking
TOWARDS the end of his new pamphlet on transport policy, published by the Conservative Political Centre, Mr. Peter Walker, shadow Minister of Transport, points out a vivid contrast between the principles animating Conservatives and Socialists. The basic difference, he suggests, lies in the attitude towards "time".
Conservatives are concerned about continuity which stretches from the past into the future. Because of the vast expenditure needed, the long life of transport systems and the historical perspective in which transport decisions must he made, "the long run to us is all important". In the long run "it is economic value for money which matters", says Mr. Walker.
The Socialists, on the other hand, believe in using public ownership and strong central powers "to impose immediate solutions —however expensive, however fantastic". The assumption is that if one scheme fails something else can be tried another time.
Behind.this typical piece of rhetoric one can see what Mr. Walker has in mind. What he calls a "long-term strategy for transport" is necessary. There is a transport problem or more exactly a series of inter-related transport problems. If they are not treated properly most of them will become worse.
No surprise
It is not sufficient to show energy and drive by presenting ambitious proposals to Parliament. The wrong solution will merely aggravate the disease or will be a palliative for one set of symptoms at the expense of another.
The principles that Mr. Walker advocates come as no surprise. In particular he believes that best value for money will be ensured in the long run through the maintenance of fair and free competition between the various forms of transport, leaving the consumer to exercise his freedom of choice "through the proper operation of the price mechanism".
He feels compelled to acknowledge that there are also some short-term considerations. Social costs and social benefits have to be taken into account. It may even be true that "in the immediate present —with an under-utilized rail system and over-congested roads—some switch from road to rail should be encouraged".
In case his readers wonder why he has spent so much time damning this same policy in and out of Parliament Mr. Walker hastens to add that, of course, it could never form part of a sensible strategy for transport "while road transport continues to cost on average considerably less than rail". If the Government had presented the Transport Bill as "a collection of shortrun panic measures" the Conservatives would at least have understood, says Mr. Walker. As a long-term policy the Bill is the exact reverse of what is needed.
Road operators may find themselves puzzled by all this. Mr. Walker seems to be talking himself into approving some form of quantity licensing, although only as a temporary measure and probably modelled more on the lines of the Dutch system than the proposals in the Bill. Political uncertainty has always given operators the excuse—which most of them have been glad to have in any case—for not taking too long-sighted a view. Mr. Walker's excursion into the philosophy of time will not impress them. They have found too often that what politicians have introduced as a brief restriction or imposition has in due course become permanent.
Even the Socialists have tried to represent quantity licensing as something limited in time. The shift from road to rail might amount to 10 per cent of road traffic over the next few years, Mr. Richard Marsh, Minister of Transport, told the House of Commons, not for the first time, during the final debate on the Bill. Operators would soon make good the loss. In spite of which there is no doubt that if the Bill is implemented quantity licensing will continue to operate until another Government puts a stop to it.
Clearly the Conservatives intend to do exactly this. Mr. Edward Heath, Leader of the Opposition, gave a clear pledge at the annual dinner of the Road Haulage Association and was repeating what Mr. Walker had said on more than one occasion previously.
Clear indication
His pamphlet .makes some interesting suggestions, mostly not new but important as a clear indication of Conservative policy. An extensive road building programme almost goes without saying. Money and resources present the main obstacle. Three possible ways of financing the roads are under consideration: road bonds to be administered by "regional authorities of sufficient size; diversion of more of the heavy taxation paid by road users; and road tolls".
The railways would be given more incentive to compete effectively and without artificial support on long-distance work. Within the towns also, different transport systems must be given the opportunity to compete "so that in the long term the most efficient methods evolve". The right of every individual to choose his means of transport will be preserved here as elsewhere.
"If a person wishes to use his car in the city centre", says Mr. Walker, "the only restriction that we shall place upon him will be to ensure that, as far as possible, he pays the full cost of his choice." This would apply particularly to the private motorist who takes up road space through on-street parking.
The pamphlet is full of substance. It leaves out very few of the proposals which the Conservatives hope to follow through when they have the power. One may still hope that some of the study groups within the Party who are discussing various aspects of transport will be taking an even longer view than Mr. Walker advocates.
The possibility must be faced that even the proper competitive environment may not rescue the railways from their long decline towards oblivion and may not enable public transport effectively to challenge the all-pervading car. There are many new developments which may change the whole transport scene. Mr. Walker himself affirms boldly that "the days of the combustion engine are numbered" as a result of the invention in the US of a battery which will give the electric car a range of 200 to 300 miles; and goes on to prophesy that this change will ultimately mean computerized motoring in which the driver dials his destination and is taken there automatically.
Of some problems there is no more than a hint. Mr. Walker repeats the estimate that over the next five to 10 years the number of cars in Britain will increase from about 10rn to 25m. This he sees as yet another piece of evidence of the need for a long-term strategy. He has no proposals for halting the increase and clearly would not approve of such proposals. On this point the political parties are at one. As the elected representatives of a car-owning democracy they could hardly express a contrary opinion.
Increase inevitable
From the standpoint of the present the increase in the number of cars is inevitable and can scarcely be halted. It is hard to find justification for saying that anybody who wanted to own a car should be prevented from doing so provided he can pass whatever tests are considered necessary.
Nevertheless the prospect is daunting. Placed end to end 25m cars would take up three circumferences of the world and there is still the prospect when that total has been reached that more and more will come on to the roads, that in fact the rate of increase will accelerate. With commercial vehicles such an increase is not so likely, and would certainly not be following the trend set in recent years.
Mr. Walker's suggestion that the motorist who wishes to enter a congested area should pay the full cost must be looked at with suspicion. The proper price is likely to be toc high for all but a few pockets. What seems inevitable is that the use of cars in general will have to be severely limited. They may have to be excluded completely from certain areas. Sporadic local government efforts towards this end have proved insufficient. Action at the national level may be needed. Whatever Government is bold enough to introduce the necessary legislation is bound to be unpopular especially when special privileges are given, as they inevitably must, to public transport and commercial goods vehicles.