AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Minister for Disarmament

15th April 1955, Page 58
15th April 1955
Page 58
Page 58, 15th April 1955 — Minister for Disarmament
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?

Political Commentary jly JANUS

The leading article in last week's issue of The Commercial Motor supported the aims over which Mr. Barber resigned. This week, Janus, at the editor's request, presents the contrary view, so that readers may have a balanced picture of the dispute. REPORTS say that the executive committee of the Road Haulage Association listened in a grim and disapproving silence to the letter of resignation from the national vice-chairman, Mr. John Barber. This reaction, or lack of reaction, is not surprising. Although the letter expresses the writer's meaning clearly and elegantly, the attitude inspiring it is opposed not merely to the policy but to the very character of the Association. It condemns the present program ne without pointing towards any practical or constructive alternative.

Mr. Barber's main contention is that the Association should now be seeking discussions with everybody else concerned, in order to reach a compromise between "those who believe in State-owned transport and those who believe in privately owned transport" Such a solution, he suggests rather naively, could be found "if the various parties concerned exercised goodwill and patience towards each other."

The sentiment is unexceptionable. It is true of every difference of opinion. Unfortunately, goodwill and patience cannot be conjured up merely by pronouncing their names. There may come a time when hauliers, politicians, traders and the public will agree to sit down together and discuss the compromise for which Mr. Barber yearns, but he fails to make out a case for suggesting that the appropriate time is the present.

Although Mr. Barber could not have expected that a letter to his national chairman would be sufficient to reverse the Association's policy, his suggestion has to face the test of whether it would work. At the moment about 14,000 vehicles have been sold by British Road Services out of a total of 32,500, and tenders have been invited for nearly another 10,000. A number of important questions is still without an answer. It is not known whether buyers will ultimately be found for everything offered, whether the larger units will sell easily, what offers would be made for attractive companies, and what (among other things) would happen in the event of a General Election.

Doubts and Hesitations

The Government are not dissatisfied with disposal so far, and intend to carry on with their Transport Act, 1953. They would not be pleased at this stage to have an approach from the R.H.A. suggesting the introduction of new legislation to call a halt to disposal. With an election not far away, they can hardly afford to show doubts and hesitations about the virtue of one of their two major acts of denationalization.

Although the political troubles of the Government are not the concern of the haulier, he is bound to recognize the uselessness of proposing a reversal of policy at the present time. Nor should he expect to gain anything from the Socialists. They might agree to take part in discussions over a compromise, but they would give no promise to abide by the results.

The British Transport Commission do not like disposal, and might support a movement to put a stop to it. They would have to reconcile themselves to aban a24 doning the draft charges scheme through which they hope to recover much of the traffic lost to road transport. Trade and industry would insist on keeping safeguards against a nationalized monopoly if B.R.S. were left With something like 20,000 vehicles and could still dominate long-distance road haulage.

Let us suppose that, in spite of obstacles, the R.H.A. succeeded in the role of mediator, to which they are not much accustomed. There is no guarantee that the extremely mixed interests, when they were finally persuaded to sit round the R.H.A. table, would produce a solution either to the R.H.A.' s liking or to that of Mr. Barber. His letter pleads for a " determined effort to find a solution which would be generally acceptable to the users of transport, to the other suppliers of transport and to the trade unions."

It would be too bad if the solution, when discovered, were not also "generally acceptable" to hauliers. Mr. Barber also speaks of "a solution which would not only be in the national interest, but one which would preserve our own future in the years that lie ahead." He evidently believes that all these solutions are one and indivisible.

Refuse to Budge

Contrary to his expectations, it is certain that each interest involved would produce its own " compromise " and refuse to budge from it. Mr. Barber's letter presupposes that there is laid up in Heaven some perfect solution to the transport problem, which has only to be enunciated to strike all beholders with its natural virtue.

There is no such ideal, if only because the interests of the beholders are at cross-purposes Mr. Barber, of all people, should realize this. An article in The Commercial Motor for December 31, 1954, reports his estimate that the general level of rates of independent hauliers in Southampton had dropped by. 10-20 per cent. below B.R.S. rates. "Speaking as chairman of the transportcommittee of Southampton Chamber of Commerce, he regarded that reduction as evidence of the benefit to trade and industry brought about by the Transport Act." Before attempting to organize a compromise between all the interests concerned in transport, it might have been as well if John Barber the trader had first reconciled himself with John Barber the haulier.

The Transport Act is far from being perfect. Armed with the knowledge they now have, the Government might have legislated differently in 1953. The fact that hauliers have never accepted the Act as precisely in line with their policy makes nonsense of Mr. Barber's fear . that, if large units are not sold, " the present Government may well blame us for having misled them."

For a resignation, timing is important. Mr. Barber should have resigned six months ago, when disposal seemed in a bad way, or six months hence, if his present fears are realized Mr. Barber has made his point a little out of season. One may hope that he has not also made his final bow, and that the R.H.A. can still find some way of making use of his services. Last month President Eisenhower appointed Mr. Harold Stassen as a kind of Minister for Disarmament. Perhaps some such post can be created for Mr. Barber within the R.H.A., where we may expect hauliers to take as much notice of him as the Americans will of poor Mr. Stassen.


comments powered by Disqus