Political Commentary
Page 54
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Better Than Prevention
AS finally embedded in the Road Traffic Act, 1956, the clause dealing with restrictions on the use of roads iiL provincial towns is complicated and in parts obscure, and it still does not deal with the kernel of the problem so far as commercial-vehicle operators are concerned. For a precise picture of what is likely to happen in the future, they must await the regulations that the Minister of Transport will draw up in due course to govern the procedure to be adopted by local authorities about restrictive orders they will now be allowed to make on their own initiative.
The clause gives new and extensive powers to local authorities, among other things, to ban or restrict waiting or the loading and unloading of vehicles, except those on stage-carriage or express-carriage work. These powers may be exercised without confirmation by the Minister, although this provision does not apply to trunk roads. It will in no circumstances be considered an argument that the ban on loading and unloading prevents reasonable access to premises, unless the ban lasts longer than six hours in a day.
With •the situation as it is, operators have scarcely been in a position to object to the clause as a whole. They must admit that congestion in certain streets and districts has reached a point where every kind of restriction has to be adopted. They also realize that, under the procedure laid down in the Road Traffic Act, 1930, the staff of the Ministry were finding it necessary to deal With an increasing number of small traffic regulations.
On the other hand, operators had before them the warning and example of Manchester, where in 1955 it was proposed to ban the loading and unloading of goods _ in some streets between 8.30 a.m. and 9.30 a.m. and between 4.45 and 6 p.m. Following a public inquiry, the Minister decided that the Order dealing with traffic in Manchester should not include the proposed ban. The train of thought leading up to his decision was one that most oimators would be prepared to follow.
Saturation Point
The Minister accepted that congestion on the roads concerned was bad both in the morning and evening rush hours, and that in some places it had reached saturation point. In spite of this, he opposed the ban unless there was proof beyond doubt that more orthodox restrictions were inadequate. Evidence at the inquiry had shown that existing regulations in Manchester were not enforced as strictly as niight be desired.
Under the terms of the new Act, Manchester Corporation obviously have a better chance than before of getting their own way unless the Minister frames his regulations so as-to make it clear that restrictions on commercial road transport should be imposed only in the last resort. That this is the opinion of the Minister is clear from his rejection of the Manchester proposals last year. Unfortunately, not everybody may think the way that he does. Where in a busy town there are so many claimants for so little space, there are bound to be conflicting views. If one section of the community can make its influence felt more strongly than the rest, there is a danger that the wrong course of action will be taken.
Few people would go so far as Lord Hore-Belisha in saying, as he did when the new clause was introduced into the House of Lords: "We want to stop this loading B20 and unloading." Possibly Lord Hare-Belisha himself did not mean his words to be taken literally. But the fact that they were spoken at all by a former Minister of Transport must make operators uneasy when to so great 'an extent they are left at the mercy of local authorities, the composition of which can vary so greatly.
The Minister still has power to intervene, but this is much different from the obligation to confirm or reject. "The arrangement in the Clause," Mr. Harold Watkinson told the House of Commons on July 30, "is that the local authorities have full autonomy, with my overriding check in case any of them—which I do not think is very likely—act in such a way as appears to be completely contrary to general policy." To estimate the strength of this assurance, operators have only to ask themselves whether the Minister would have intervened at Manchester if the proposals for that city had been made, after instead of before the passing of the Road Traffic Act, 1956.
Guerilla Warfare
Hauliers and C-licence holders, with the support of passenger operators where their interests are affected, have for many years engaged in guerilla warfare with local authorities who have attempted to impose restrictions on loading and unloading. The measure of the success of such bodies as the National Road-Transport Federation can be divined fromthe fact that the new clause in the new Act has been found necessary.
A more general engagement is likely as soon as the Minister has issued his promised regulations. In the meantime, operators should give careful attention to the terms of the new Act, which will largely govern the effectiveness of their protests in the future. Careful consideration must subsequently be given to every local proposal likely to interfere with the freedom of trade and industry to have their goods collected and delivered. Where the proposal seems unnecessary or unfair, everything should be done to oppose it, and the protest should be given the widest possible publicity. '
As important as safeguards against the abuse by local authorities of their new powers is the need for a determined 'effort to change the circumstances that make restrictions necessary, or at least that provide arguments in their favour. The problem is one where cure is better than prevention, and no better motto than this could be found for the conference on urban motorways to take place between September 18 and 20 under the auspices of the British Road Federation.
Delegates will be attending from something like 10.0 county councils, county .boroughs, Metropolitan boroughs and municipal corporations. It is all to the good that these representatives should get together and hear experts from their own and other countries. The danger is that, now they have increased powers to control traffic within their territory, they may wish to keep down their own expenditure by suggesting that more road facilities are not needed, or that a comprehensive plan for urban motorways is impracticable in Great Britain. It is to be hoped that at least a sprinkling of road users and road makers will attend the conference to make sure that their owci points of view are given due weight.