AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

SERVICE

17th February 1961
Page 55
Page 55, 17th February 1961 — SERVICE
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?

Take but degree away, untune that string And hark what discord follows: each thing meets In mere oppugnancy.

SERIOUS though the Merchandise Transport decision is, the degree of shock that it has administered to hauliers may seem out of all proportion. The majority of hauliers, apart from those on long-distance work, may feel little effect, at least for some considerable time to come. Traders and manufacturers in general, once they have examined more closely the opportunity to carry for hire or reward, may well decide it is not worth the bother.

If after all they wish to proceed, there are other ways of attaining their objective. The Merchandise Transport decision is merely the culminating point of a number of cases in which operators with vehicles on A contract • licence or on contract hire have been able to convert to ordinary A licence with little difficulty. The consequences have been plain to see for some time and hauliers, although they have grumbled and in some cases pushed their objections to the appeal stage, have not seemed wildly alarmed.

What is special about the latest case? The answer is quite evidently that hauliers, see in it the first example of a straightforward conversion from C licence to A licence with no side issues to suggest that it may be an exceptional • case. It requires from the haulier a new attitude of mind. He feels like some watcher of the skies when a new planet swims into his ken.

PREVIOUSLY the viewpoint of the haulier had been taken for granted. He had seldom wavered in his opinion that the trader had something near to a divine right to operate as many vehicles as he liked, and in whatever circumstances he liked, so long as he was carrying only his own goods. This apparently altruistic view prevailed even during the period of nationalization, when the C-licence holder, having escaped in the nick of time from proposals designed to limit his radius of operation, was allowed to continue, exactly as before, whereas the haulier, including the holder of an A contract licence, needed a permit for any journey beyond a distance of 25 miles from his garage.

British Road Services and British Railways, especially the latter, thought differently. Muffled at first, their complaints gradually became more distinct, until it became a matter of course that each annual report of the British Transport Commission should have its reference to the rapid growth in the number of C-licensed vehicles and the increase in competition that this growth represented. More recently the suggestion has been added that independent hauliers ought to be at one with the B.T.C. at least in their attitude towards the C licence.

The response of the hauliers to any such invitation has been cold. One explanation sometimes given is that the C-licence holder, in another manifestation, is the hauliers' customer and must be humoured even if he is taking traffic away by the use of his own vehicles. This, of course, would apply also to the B.T.C. and is valid only to a limited extent, apart from providing a plausible excuse for those hauliers who, for obscurer reasons, have no wish to attack the C-licence holder.

Their attitude has been governed more completely by the fact that they approve of the licensing system, to which the freedom to carry one's own goods forms an essential corollary. The B.T.C., it is true, also approve of the system, but see it from the outside. Even B.R.S., although theoretically part of it, find little difficulty in practice in getting what licences they need. There is no reason that the B.T.C. can understand for not making the restrictions tighter, whereas the hauliers, having lived within the system for so long, appreciate how the parts are inter-related.

NOT that they think the system perfect. But their objection to the peculiar and privileged position of the farmer C-licence holder, for example, is that it is an anomaly, an aberration that draws attention to the direction in which the true north lies. The exception proves the rule. With more and more difficulty, hauliers have tried to apply the same principle to what they cannot help thinking have been some very queer decisions by the Transport Tribunal over the past few years. The limit has now been reached and overstepped. Hauliers feel that, now the Merchandise Transport case has been settled, it is no longer possible to make sense of the licensing system.

There is a real danger that the disorientated hauliers may begin to doubt their previously unquestioned belief in the freedom of the trader to carry his own goods. Their former attitude, after all, is not one that would be taken for granted in every industry. The point of view of the B.T.C. is far commoner. The do-it-yourself man comes in for severe criticism from tradesmen who allege he is taking away their livelihood.

The haulier has not been moved to protest in the same way, even when he has built up an efficient transport organization which the customer has then taken over for himself. Such a procedure, disheartening though it might be, has seemed part of the natural course of events. The case is altered when the customer not merely elects to carry his own traffic under C licence, but is aiming to carry the other traffic of the haulier as well. The haulier, who at times has almost boasted that he is a servant of the public, questions the whole basis of his servitude.

FROM the point of view of the C-licence holder this could be a subversive way of thinking and it has its dangers for him. The hauliers have considered themselves closer to him than to the railways and have joined with him in representations to the Government on such things as roads and the construction and use of vehicles. What could now happen is that hauliers would tend to regard themselves as professional carriers rather than as road transport operators. They would be drawn to ally themselves with the B.T.C.

Politielly the combination would be extremely powerful. The influence of the haulier over the Conservative Party has been exaggerated to the point of absurdity, but there is a feeling within the party that the hauliers, in addition to being vociferous about free enterprise; have played their part in justifying it.

If the Government are for these reasons inclined to be sympathetic to the road haulage case, they will hear with real anxiety what the 13.T.C. have to say. One last desperate effort is in hand to bring the railways backto solvency. The latest activity of the Transport Tribunal can hardly be said to be helping the effort. All in all, there will be powerful arguments to persuade the Government to positive action with the intention of saving the licensing system from disintegration.


comments powered by Disqus