AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

THE BIG FIX

16th June 1961, Page 45
16th June 1961
Page 45
Page 45, 16th June 1961 — THE BIG FIX
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?

LL over the world, road operators complain that the

railways, usually because they are state-controlled, are given preferential treatment and are exploiting their privileged situation unfairly. They are accused of manipulating the law (even when it is so manifestly in their favour), of promoting subversive and concealed propaganda against their competitors and of cutting rates below the economic level in pursuance of a policy of getting traffic at all costs. .

If this kind of thing is the regular practice in Great Britain, it is only occasionally that one hears about it. For the most part the policy of road operators is to live and let live; or perhaps the law is so much on the side of the railways that they have no need to go any further! This does not seem to be the case in some other countries, to judge from the fact that operators there are continually uncovering evidence of what they regard as railway skulduggery, or at any rate definitely unfriendly actions.

For example, the Long Distance Road Transport Association of Australia complain strongly that the Minister for Transport has allowed railway detectives to spy on the activities of road transport operators. The allegation is that the detectives spent three days in a checking station Of the Department of Motor Transport, and that 'their object was to find out whether operators were complying with the regulations for drivers' hours. In the opinion of the association, the Minister has a "definite bias" in favour of the state-owned railways and buses;. there should be a separate Minister for road transport, they say. Even the firmest opponents of transport integration in Britain have not gone quite so far as this.

TIHE Australian association estimate that the railways in • the Commonwealth will have a deficit of 13.5m. this year, in contrast to an estimated £80m. paid by the road transport industry in taxes. One suggested explanation isthat the railways have "deliberately slashed" inter-state rates to a level at which it is not possible to make a profit. Rates from Sydney to Albury are said to be over three times the rates to Melbourne, ISO miles farther away. The object may be to drive hauliers off the road, but, say the association, "the road transport industry still conveys huge tonnages of goods between the capital cities.

On the other side of the world, in the U.S.A., there is a similar criticism that the railways "have gone way beyond what would be justified by cost saving." The statement comes from a representative of the National Automobile Transporters Association. Cars are being carried by rail on the piggyback system and on two-decker and threedecker rail cars, and the railways claim that their rates meet the cost of providing the service. The argument from the road side is that the charges barely cover running costs. In support of this it is pointed out that the more traffic the railways carry the less profit they make.

Australia and even the U.S. may seem sufficiently remote for British operators to remain merely curious to learn what variations of their own difficulties are to be found in those countries. There are other nearer places where the working out of the road-rail problem may have a more direct effect. It is interesting to note that the decline of the railways is well-nigh universal. If in some countries the railways are fighting back, the results may spread.

In Western Germany, for example, the continued dominance of the railways, when it comes to legislation, has led to the fixing of rates schedules for road operators. Because of this, like the fox in the fable, the German operators are tireless in advocating that all the other countries of Europe should adopt the same system. There are apparently powerful arguments in favour. The impulse towards a united Europe is growing continually stronger. It must involve the smoothing away of tariffs and this in turn means there must be no hidden subsidies giving the products of one country an unfair advantage over those of another. Because transport charges may provide one obvious .method for arranging such a subsidy, there is a good deal to be said for levelling the charges at the same time as the tariffs. From this point of view fixed rates schedules seem a powerful factor in promoting the comity ot nations.

Ar first glance the prospect may even look attractive to operators. Fixed rates would at least mean an end to price. cutting, whether by other hauliers or by the railways. They could even at long last give reality to the ancient dream of competition based entirely on service. If this were so. however, German operators should already have reached the pinnacle of happiness, but there is no evidence that this has happened so far.

It is hardly likely that operators would be allowed to fix their own rates, nor would this be desirable. An impartial authority such as the Transport Tribunal would have 'to be called in or created. Interested parties would be allowed to nut their views and the railways would almost inevitably play a leading part in drawing up the final schedules. Stringent control would be needed to ensure that the agreed rates were actually charged and that there were no hidden rebates.

In spite of the possible objections, the persuasion of the German operators has been sufficient to start an argument in several languages. Countries that are not yet prepared to go the whole way may agree, for example, that large blocks of traffic should be carried at approved rates. Among Continental operators there is much talk about what is known as the fourchette, or, in other words, cornplementary schedules of maximum and minimum rates.

AT the present mon-ent it is almost impossible to discuss any international subject without referring to the possibility of Great Britain's entering the Common Market. British operators must prepare themselves for the changes that this would bring. Their considered opinion is on the whole opposed to the fixing of rates. With such an infinite variety of operations and of conditions it would he difficult, if not impossible, to devise schedules that were fair to every operator. The position is further complicated by the freedom of the customer to make some other arrangement for the carriage of his goods if the fixed rates do not appeal to him. Restrictions might have to be imposed on this freedom. Other regulations would be introduced in order to force the transport industry into the rigid framework of rates schedules. Whatever happens, the suspicion of road operators is that they will stand to lose and the railways to gain.


comments powered by Disqus