Road Haulage in the Melting Pot
Page 25
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Dealing With Three Main Matters of Topical Interest or Possible Importance in Their Effects on the Post-war Condition of Transport
By " Tantalus "
FOR members of the road-haulage industry last week has been eventful, • in that there . were recorded thrbe items of supreme interest, First, the silence of the associations respecting the views recently expressed by Lord Leathers, Minister of War Transport, has been broken' by one of these bodies, Secondly, road haulage has been given an official publicity boost. Thirdly, there appears an instance of the treatment meted out to an ex-haulier discharged from the Army as knedicolly unfit and desiring to 're-enter the industry.
Whilst, to the 'general public, these incidents might be regarded merely as items of regular new, for the haulier , they have definite meaning and significance:
. In respect of -the first item, the " Daily Telegraph "• dated December 9, 1943, printed a letter from Major R. A. B. Smith, president of the-C.M.U.A„ in which he stated " the members of my Ass-ociation are adopting a cautious attitude in regard to the reply made by Lord Leathers during the debate in the House of Lords on postwar transport." Major Smith continues -that if it be the desire of the Minister that there should exist a better understanding between the competitive forms of inland
, transport, whilst preserving the eilic.ient service provided by private enterprise, then he can count on good support. if, however, the Minister desires to give one branch of • transport benefit at the expense of another, then, in the cutilic interest as in its own, it will be the duty of the industry. to'resist the proposals.
Home Transport a Political Issue The final point made by Major Smith referred, as fol lows, to the political aspect:— . .
-" As it would appear that home transport has become a political issue, it will be for the road-transport industry to endeavour, in the interests of all concerned, to place its case on a more favourable basis, a pursuit made easier by the greater unity in the industry."
The first impression, after reading the foregoing, was that Major Smith was expressing his personal views or acting as spoltesnian for the membership of the C.M.U.A. If the views expressed are to be regarded as a staterilent of policy to be acted upon, it must be conceded that the phraseology is mild and carefully chosen, governed rather by some measure of restraint and even, timidity. than the bold throwing down of the gauntlet. _ To say that the members of the C.M.U.A. are adopting a cautious attitude towards the Governments intentions is as alarming as it is incomprehensible. Why are they " adopting " at this • stage? Surely Major Smith, through his colleagues, some of whom, it is to be assumed,-sit on every committee that has been set up in connection with road transport, has known for the past three years the views of Whitehall and of the intention to impose a policy of repression and restriction. Why was a protest not Made when the writing on the wall was first so Clearly to be seen, instead of raising a belated cry when the industry already -is bound hand and foot by the chains of control? Had the associations been inspired by the needs of the memberships, particularly of small operators, And, in fighting, had been governed -solely by these motives, the surrender of the industry could
have been averted. , .
The omission of a considered statement of policy by the associations in relation to the \var.-time Government scheme of control has been most disturbing to hauliers. They-have, .in fact; been entirely at a loss to understand the silence, for the mattei concerns a straight issue. Either the policy of the Government is right or it is 'unjust to the general body of hauliers.. It it, or is not, in.the.natiOnal interest on the grounds of economy, finance and suitability of service, These points considered, it should be a simple
matter for the representative bodies to make up their minds in this matter. This they failed' to do and adopted instead an attitude of drift and indecision.
If, at last, the associations or, more correctly, the C.11,U.A., has recognized the danger signal and, consequently, is prepared to fight for the future of the hauliers, there is need for a much clearer and more defined statement of policy than that contained in Major Smith' i letter.
Now comes the second item of interest, which deals with
the publicity boost. Doubtless, many readers of this journal have seen the article which appeared in the issue of the ". Sunday Express" dated. December 12, 1943, headed " Road H.Q. Mobilize% to Save Arms Hold-up," and heard also the broadcast of a driver describing how road transport came to the rescue of the railways at a time when the latter were unable to deal with the cargoes of Atlantic convoys. It appears that unless, on that occasion, thousands of tons of war equipment could be moved swiftly to the factories a serious hold-up would ensue. In relatieg the details' the article paid a well-deserved tribute to the drivers, who wOrked •night and day during the emergency. A prominent feature of the article was the point emphasizing that the' successful moving of so large a ,volume of war materials, at short notice, was., rendered poseible
through the Government's Road Haulage Scheme. As matters stand to-day, this may be so; but few peopfe well versed in haulage matters will disagree with the view that the problem could have been dealt with equally successfully, and probably more easily, within the industry itself had the opportunity been granted. Generally, the cumbersome, official machine does not lend itself to the handling of such emergencies.
As—to the third point of interest, regarding the reinstatement of ex-Servicemen in the industry. This is a cause which for some time past has been championed within the columns of —The Commercial Motor." Time after time the representative bodies have been strongly criticized for failing to deal with this Vital problem. In the excellent editorial appearing in the issue dated December 10, 1943, there is revealed the story of most callous:and unjust' treatment meted out by the authorities to an unfortunate. ex-haulier seeking to re-enter the industry after war service. Whether or not, as a result of the matter being raiSed in the House of Commons, the' licence eventually, will begranted to the applicant is entirely a secondary matter.
A.R.O. Chairman Fails to Respond
The point at issue is that Of the position of ex-Servicemen who were engaged originally in the haulage industry and who, upon receiving their diNharge, desire to be reinstated. It may be recalled that in the number of " The Commercial Motor " published on November. 5, 1943, reference was made to the fact that Mr. Richardson, chairman A.R.O., resented certain remarks contained inethese columns relative to the subject under discussion. As a result, Mr. Richardson was invited togive categorical answers to the following
gnestions:— • (I) Is it, the policy of the A.R.O. to fight for the Ire-war status of hauliers to be restored, even though a smaller number of vehicles is now operative through no fault of the haulier?
;(2) Is it the policy of the A.R.O. to fight. for _the claims of the members of the industry, now serving With H.M. Forces, to be reinstated if they .so desire? A eerily to these queotioris is still awaited. Is it to be concluded that the A.R.O. has not yet decided what shall be the attitude of the Association, that, in fact, no ,clecision has heen reached' in this matter? It is 'one of superlative importance to those ex-hauliers now in the Services and is a duty and -obligation which the reprepentative bodies, perforce, must accept.