No Echo
Page 65
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
HIGH drama is too much to expect froth the extremely desiccated summaries that are all the public are now allowed to know about the annual reports of the icensing Authorities for Goods Vehicles: But it is still 11-prising that the summaries do not give back even a pale ho of the licensing controversies that have distracted
antlers for several years past. ,
Outside events have left a plain enough mark, which as been duly noted in the appropriate reports. The latest. sue, covering the 12 months to the end of September, )57, points out that fuel was rationed for six months of te period. The staff of the . Ministry of Transport dministered the rationing system, and Were not available )r enforcement work, so that no comparison with _ revious years is possible on that point. Anotheihenomenon observed during tht. rationing period was the ,rge increase in the number of applications for C licences, iainly for utility vehicles. No doubt, according to the !ports, the hope was to secure bigger fuel rations.
The reports for 1954-55 note some temporary dislocation tused by the railway strike in June, 1955. Other reports :fer to the changes in the structure of the industry as a :sult of nationalization and denationalization, which rought the vehicles of the British Transport Commission ack into the licensing system, and created a new, if npermanent, feature in the form of the special A licence. In general, the reports draw a picture, or-an outline, of n industry that is making uniform pi-ogress. If allowance made for acquisitions by British Road Services; the chicle strength in each category of road haulage licence as increased slowly, but steadily, ever since the war, [though lagging considerably behind such pointers to rogress as the official index of industrial production. The umber of C-licensed vehicles, on the other hand, has 'creased threefold.
Regional Variations
As may be expected, the increases in each type of licence ave been spread evenly over the 11 traffic area& One of le few exceptions is the rise of over 75 per cent.. from 990 ) 1,749, between the end of 1954 and the end of 1955, in le number of vehicles on'contract-A licences in the Fast lidland area. For the whole country, the increase was bout 30 per cent. Disappointingly, the reports dealing rith that year mention the large number of applications ar contract-A licences, which they attribute to the abolition f the 25-mile limit, but make no attempt to account for le marked regional variations.
Study of the reports for recent years shows a tendency ar the average weight of vehicles on A or B licence to icrease, and for that of vehicles on C licence to increase lore slowly, if at all. The picture is a little blurred ecause of nationalization, but the trend is reasonably clear. a the end of 1957. the proportions of vehicles with an nladen weight of 3 tons and over, on A, contract-A, pecial A and B licence, were 31.2, 44.1, 62.3 and 17.5 per ent. respectively. At the end of 1953, when for the first ime B.T.C. vehicles were included and there were no pecial &licences, the percentages were 31.8 for A. 27.8 for ontract-A, arid 10.3 for B. In the same four years, the roportion of heavy vehicles on C licence went up only rom 6.5 to 7.5 per cent. On the other hand, the proportion rf C-licensed vehicles weighing less than 1 ton unladeit also ,creased, from 441 to 48.2 per cent
The reports appear to contradict complaints sometimes Made by hauliers that B.T.C. objections are increasing in number. • The number of notifiable applications does not change a great deal. For example, there were 23,750 in 1951-52 and 30,433 in 1956-57. Recorded objections in the two years were 13,813 and 11,531, and the proportion lodged by the B.T.C: fell from 59 to 52 per cent. .
A comparison between the same two years alio provides no evidence that. applicants are now faring more badly than in' the past. In each year, for example, the Northern Licensing Authority—Mr. S. W. Nelson in 1952, and now Mr. J. A. T. Harlon—refused one application for A and 14 for B licences. Mr. Nelson turned down 20, and Mr. -Hanlon 22 applications for variations. In the largest area, covering the Metropolitan district, Brig. R. J. 0. Dowse refused nine A, five contract-A and 107 B licences in 1952; and 11 A and 117 B licences in 1957. Variations refused in the two years were 43 and 32 respectively.
The, pattern varies in each area, but not in such a way as to show that hauliers are -being"persecuted any more now than they. were before the passing of the Transport Act, 1953. The new significance that they have .attached to the declaration of normal user, and to Section 9(4) of that Act, is only very cautiously admitted by the Licensing Authorities in their latest reports.
False Statement
The first reference to cases under Section 9(4) appears to have been in the reports for 1954-55, where it is stated that two operators, one in Yorkshire and one in the Southeastern area, were cautioned as to further conduct in relation to statements made for the purpose of securing the grant of licences. In the following year, an A licence was revoked by the Northern Licensing Authority, because of a false statement Made by the holder in order to obtain a variation.
• Last year, three cases were reported. In the South-eastern area a contract-A licence for one vehicle, and in the Northern area a special A licence covering a vehicle and a trailer, were revoked. The West Midland Licensing Authority warned an operator who had been using vehicles from a base other than the one for which his licence had been granted.
There seems no cause for alarm over a handful of cases; but the latest reports have a comment that may be significant. The existence of' Section 9(4), they point out, " and the knowledge that an applicant may be called upon. at any time to justify the description of goods to be carried normally or areas to be served, has meant that more careful attention is given to statements of intention or, expectation."
Whether it is the operator or the Licensing Authorities who are giving the "careful attention" is not clear, There is no doubt that hauliers are becoming increasingly, aware of Section 9(4), and of the allied problem of normal user. What makes the reports of the Licensing Authorities additionally difficult to follow as a guide is the absence of any reference to cases such as those of Knight and fiesketh, who were refused new licences when the old ones clnly expired.
Presumably, as there is technically no such thing as the" renewal " of a licence, these cases are concealed somewhere in the statistical summary of applications and variations refused.