AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

The Cippenham Report — A Bad Business.

15th July 1919, Page 1
15th July 1919
Page 1
Page 2
Page 1, 15th July 1919 — The Cippenham Report — A Bad Business.
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?

Keywords : Cippenham

HE CIPPENHAM scheme is a bad bit of business altogether, and the report of the Select Committee of the two Houses of Parliament issued last week goes to show that our original criticisms, uttered on the first mooting of the proposal and afterwards, were dbsolutely justified. Time and again were we told in. those early days that we were on a wrong 'rm." But the criticisms of the Cippenham scheme constituted no "stunt" ; they were dictated by a judgment which time has fully upheld.

The report of the Select Committee can be obtained from His Majesty's Stationery Office for the small sum of two pence (we shall be glad to obtain and send a copy to any reader who wishes for one and cannot readily obtain it himself), and it was published in full in The Tines; our forecast published in our last issue was accurate, if brief. Hence, we do pot intend to occupy space with a further digest of its contents.

The need for such a depot as was established near Slough and the wisdom of creating it are unquestioned, but the need was foreseen in 1916, and was impressed -upon the War Office in 1917, August 2nd in that year being the date on which the proposal took concrete form. But, until February 12th, 1918, the scheme was locked up within the four walls of the War Office. It escaped apparently, and reached the War Cabinet on May 7th, thus showing wonderful acceleration through the congested traffic of Whitehall! Building was started on June 11th, and by Armistice day the work, which had been carried out by the Royal Engineers, amounted to the establishment of a camp, the diversion of a road, and the making of a railway cutting. That was the time to call a halt to the scheme, which had failed as a war-time measure, was not economical for demobilization purposeS, and was not at that time (and certainly is not now) justified for post-bellum Army purposes, The committee say that they cannot avoid the con clusion that Lord haverfortit bad made up his mind upon the future of the depot, and the uses for which he projected it, and the responsibility for persevering with the scheme is ascribed to him alone. The bung-. ling and waste have been enormous, and confidence' in Lord Inverferth as the Minister of Supply has been. considerably disturbed.

• The future of the depot is a serious problem. Profits are claimed to be earned on the chassis now being repaired. But only vehicles calling for slight repairs are being tackled, capital charges are pro bably not being taken into account, anal sale prices are at the moment unduly inflated.

There should be enough work to occupy the depot for about three years, and then, perhaps, it will be thrown on the market. In view of the criticisms upon the alethod of disposing -of the country's stock of linen, it would seem desirable to secure, at once, from the Government a pledge that, when the depot becomes available for sale, it shall not be offered to or allowed to be purchased by any concern of foreign origin, interests' or connection.

The Withdrawn Tyre Mileage Guarantee.

THE DISCUSSION aroused by the withdrawal of the guarantee of a, minimum mileage for solid band tyres by those makers who are members of the British Rubber Tyre Manufacturers' Association has taken curious lines and, yet, to the close student of the motor industry, those lines, however contradictory they appear, have been quite logical. Some users have regarded the action as the withdrawal of benefits analogous to those offered by assurance, saying "we no doubt have paid a little more per tyre, having received in return for that extra, payment an undertaking that we shall be recouped for any mileage short of 10,000, and we would hate been prepared to continue on those lines, becaaree we could accurately express tyre depreciation in figures." Others say "we have, with careful treatment, invariably exceeded the guaranteed mileage and we do not want to be compelled to pay for a guakantee which is'useless to us but which no doubt benefits the less careful user." , In a recent contribution our trenchant critic " The 'Inspector," taking as he usually does, a strong line, expressed the firm conviction that the makers who had withdrawn the guarantee were unwise, would discover their error and would retract. That °pillion received no editorial support, because we felt that there was something more to be heard on the subject from the manufacturers. .

We have a great faith in and admiration for the innate honesty of the tyre trade. Different makes of tyres will differ in. their-behaviour, but there is a good deal to be written (and perhaps we will shoitly deal with the question) on the subject of selecting the particular make of tyre for the particular job in a particular district. Admitting this difference, we go so far as to say (as the workman. said of the-beer) that there is no bad British-made band tyre. This innate honesty of the makers of tyres should make for fair and honourable treatment of users whenever

need for complaint arises and, as the result of inquiries which we have instituted, we intend to deal in a subsequent issue rather more fully with the whole question of the guarantee, its origin and to where it was leading, and the value of the substitute which has been offered in its place.

Advisory Committees—An Addendum.

WE COMMENTED recently on the unsatisfactory position as regards the report of the Advisory Committee on motor vehicles formed to assist the Surplus Government .Property Disposal Board to devise an intelligent method of getting.rid of returned vehicles.

It was, as we then stated, already apparent that the advice of this Committee must in some respects have been ignored and,. consequently, that the busy men who had been invited Vo serve upon it had, in effect, been hoodwinked into wasting their time, in order that the public should believe that the Surplus Government Property Disposal Board was receiving and acting upon expert advice. The report of the Select Committee which inquired into the Slough scandal makes it clear that we had good grounds for criticising the treatanent of the" Ads visory Committee. The Select Committee finds that "the only expert body which considered the question of repairing old army vehicles before sale recommended that no lorry should be repaired at a greater cost than £150. The Disposal Board,. which does not consist of motor experts, did not include this recommendation in forwarding the Advisory Committee's Report to the Council. Had the reisommendation been adhered to, it would have materially altered the commercial aspect of the repair depot." This reveals a most unsatisfactory state of affairs and shows what abuses are liable to follow the formation of advisory committees so constituted that they can only report confidentially to a Minister or other official. Clearly, when this is the ease, there is a, danger that those to whom the report goes will alter or cut it about in such a way as to change its sense . altogether. .

We have, therefore, clear proof of our previous contention to the effect that any advisory committee must necessarily have the power of publishing its reportg so that, when its advice is not acted upon, the Public may judge the issue. In the ease quoted, the facts have only come out accidentally. Now that they have come out at all, the, effect must surelybe to . strengthen the hands of those Who maintain that the . advisory committees to be formed in connection with the Ministry of Transport nnist be in no way muzzled.

Our National Economic Policy.

WHILE WE STILL await the announcement of the Government as to what the economic policy is to be, we can, at least, gain a little information by studying the Parliamentary debate -on the new Import Duties in the Finance Bill. During this debate, the special case of -motor vehicles was frequently mentioned. There are, of course, Many considerations which must carry weight in determin-' ing a fiscal policy, but, apparently, the last thing that anyone may suggest in the House of Commons is that import duties could possibly be desirable because they would serve as safeguards of home industries.

During the debate, Major Kelley gave the opinion that the duties on motorcars should not be considered from the point of view -of free trade or protection but from that of fair play. " The motorcar builders in this country handed over their works to the 'Government for war purposes, and to allow any other nation to come in before our motor worksshad grit back to their old position would be unfair." This statement was immediately greeted by a member of the House as a glaring indiscretion. It was stated that Major 'Kelley had let the cat out of the box. In other words, he had been so indiscreet -as to admit that the fair treatment of maintenance of industry should erineeivably be allowed to influence the Government policy.

Opponents of any system of import duties or prefers ential 'tariff were moved to laughter. Clearly, theHouse of Commons has not got far towards realizing that things. have happened during the war such as to produce an abnormal situation calling for an ab

normal remedy. . -, There are people to whom free trade is a positive religion, and even a temporary duty for the purpose of restoring equilibrium is, therefore, an unforgivable sacrilege. It is imperative that, despite all such opposition, the Government -should adopt a bold policy of import duties as safeguards for industry. An 'announcement of the policy, whatever it is to he. becomes daily more urgent-. If we refuse to tell people the conditions -under which they are to do business, we cannot blame them if they hesitate to define their policy and plan their future nreduction.


comments powered by Disqus