After all these years transport's voice is muted. Why doesn't
Page 44
Page 45
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
it make more impac on Government? We speak to CIT preside Sir James Duncan
IN PREVIOUS articles in this series I have suggested that the obvious "crusading" body on behalf of transport is the Chartered Institute, which embraces within its membership nearly 18,000 people of whom more than half — the Fellows and Members — are professionals.
If the transport "voice" has not been taken seriously by Government despite expert lobbying, then two things follow. The situation must be accepted, because of the inherent difficulties in concerting a common "voice" for all transport modes or, as I would prefer, everyone employed in transport should seek to remedy a highly unsatisfactory position.
I have yet to meet anyone with any experience in transport who is satisfied with the political status of the industry — defining the industry as covering all modes of transport. The argument begins when polemical journalists like me suggest ways in which matters could be improved.
Rightly or wrongly, I think that the consumer voice has to be added to the voice of transport professionals in order to make a more telling case with Government. The attitude of many transport leaders seems to be that this is simply not on, though I prefer to think it has not yet been tried!
It seemed appropriate that the president of the CIT, Sir James Duncan, should be interviewed for this series of articles. He is chairman of the Transport Development Group, probably the most successful commercial organisation in road haulage, storage and plant hire in Europe, if not worldwide, TDG Group companies have a reputation in the industry for good customer service, generally satisfactory labour relations and sound commercial enterprise. With all the difficulties of recession TDG in 1980, were able to conjure up profits before tax of over E21m — over £10m from road haulage. If the political climate for transport is not all, it should be, at least TDG have been able to weather the storm pretty well.
One of the traditional tasks of CIT presidents is to read through the past presidential addresses of the Chartered Institute. This is a formidable task, for the Institute was founded in 1919; it will be a mind-boggling exercise in 100 years time.
Sir James sketched out for me the origin of the CIT, set up basically to provide a platform for transport men to express their views on transport matters and also to impart their experience to others. From the earliest years transport education was seen as vital.
The founders took the view that transport men were men of a kind, though each might work in a different transport mode. There was the realisation that the transport job demanded much specialised knowledge. This is one reason, in Sir James' view, why there have not been many exceptional men like Sir Peter Masefield and Sir Reginald Wilson, who have demonstrated commanding skills in two or more transport modes.
I suggested that the relative dearth was a criticism of transport employers, often too parochial to urge their bright young ,.men to gain experience in a number of transport modes.
Sir James said that in road haulage, certainly on the long distance side, the view was that several years experience was necessary to acquire executive skills. But anyone employed in transport could broaden his experience by mixing with colleagues from other modes at Institute meetings.
From the outset the Institute accepted that transport was an important part of economics, a part that had been neglected. Knowledge of transport economics was best advanced by discussion and the presentation of formal papers. This has been done.
I needed no persuading that wide-ranging transport discussions were good for people in. the industry but why, after 60 years, was transport's voice so ineffective in influencing Government? The answer seems to lie in the make-up of the transport industry.
"The Institute can provide a platform for each sector to speak but you only have to look at transport to see huge conflicts of opinion," said Sir James.
When he read through the addresses of earlier presidents, Sir James found a number of 'recurring themes. "We know what doesn't work but we don't know what does work: there is still much debate on the merits of co-ordination, integration and competition."
Even if all CIT members agreed that the aim of transport professionals was to give customer satisfaction in service, quality and price, there would be room for argument as to the best method of achieving these ends.
James Duncan, a convinced believer in the merits of competition in the commercial arena succeeded as President Dr L. St J. Devlin, whose Irish organisation, the CIE, has immense problems of financial solvency.
You could hardly find a bigger contrast between CIE and the Transport Development Group, though it is only fair to say that the two organisations are differently constituted and serve different ends.
The trouble with transport is that there are so many in conflicts. Buses compete railways for passenger su01 the rail-road freight contest smoulders in certain set "So the CIT can rarely comb with an informed view that satisfy all members." On some relatively narroi, pects of policy, transi consensus is possible. Virli all transport professionals m more public money spent of rastructu re.
That was the basis for th most unprecedented sub sion to the Secretary of Stat Transport from the RHA, British Road Federation, Si Railways, the National Fn Company, and several traria related trade unions.
The CIT, for some.inexplit reason, was not asked to much to Sir James' annoyer The CIT, you might would seem a broad en's vehicle for virtually all trare education or specialist stU But there has recently ' established an Institute of 11 and Tourism, with what to me to be some admii comprehensive exam inatior
We discussed whether ii port was a profession. Sir Jr recalled the Masefield Re published a few years 1:1 which suggested the title T. portant — the name of al Zealand transport journal indicate stature in the indual
One of the things that pleased Sir James in 1 years has been the incre prominence of road haulieli quite a few Institute section chairmen are road hauliers, In his own lifetime Sir Jk has seen a fledgeling secte me the dominant force in eight transport. The growth of DG is a romantic story in itself ell worthy of a place in the anis of history.
I was reminded of the growth the size of road haulage fleets, ith all that this has meant to anagerial expertise. When he me into the industry as a ung man, Sir James' firm, J. purling Ltd, operated 28 hides along with a flourishing harfingers business. The deme of barge traffic was a sadess, but in terms of the flourishg growth of road haulage, just ne of the facets of economic ality.
It is possible to cull from Sir ames Duncan's presidential idress to the CIT some themes at would get a lot of support. oad haulage people, he urged, et some store by simplicity, irectness and a concentration n bare essentials. They have ttle time for ostentation and ley know that value for money ; necessary to survival."
Most transport managers fould echo the words of Sir eter Masefield, a former presient: "Our customers are the urpose of our business, not an iterruption of our work."
That is true of transport perators and no less true of the istitute, vis-à-vis its memers. Without efficient service le most sympathetic memership drifts away.
An extraordinary feature of ansport is the way in which old iemes recur. Consider this atement: "There is one thing that all aders are unanimous about, id that is that they should be )le, without undue exertion id difficulty, to meet with the an in real authority who has e power to come to to a defite arrangement in connection ith their transport problems ithout constant reference to a ?ad office situated, as it may ?, some hundreds of miles vay."
That comment, by a railway anager, some 47 years ago, is surely been applied, with eat force, to the TDG commies over which Sir James, as oup chairman, presides.
But the thought is surely relent to my theme of bringing Insumer interests into the insport equation. If traders ..n, and now, wanted positive lp froen a responsible transrt manager, how much more is this true of the individual transport customer whether holiday tourist or daily commuter?
If transport is, in the famous phrase, "not only a key industry, but the industry which keeps the keys of all other industries" the question must still be asked why transport is not taken more seriously by government.
Is it largely because of the endless political controversy about the merits of state and private enterprise in transport, when it would have been more fruitful to have both, side by side, within a framework designed to make fair comparisons possible?
Would it be true, as I strongly suspect, that the general consensus of transport, people that more public money is needed for infrastructure was only possible because the signatories of the message to Mr Fowler know quite well that the Government, and not the transport industry, will decide the investment in roads, in rail electrification, the Channel Tunnel, and better airports in the Eighties?
Is it inevitable that transport, as a collection of industries in different modes, is doomed to tear itself apart because of competitive rivalries, when a more considered approach would be beneficial to all modes, and to the public?
Is it inevitable that transport should pit itself against the environment lobby, in a match that plays into the hands of the politicians, who listen to people more attentively than to trade associations?
If transport is no more than a competitive doghouse, Government can well afford to stand aside, in amused contempt, well knowing that transport men are doomed to disagree, and quite incapable of any meaningful consensus.
Put crudely, if Government left all transport regulation to the "professionals" would there be mutual aid amonst transport operators in the various modes, or fraticidal strife?
I think the weakness of transport, the reason why its voice is muted, is that it lacks political perception. Without a regulatory framework imposed by government, transport operators alone would find it difficult, if not impossible, to agree rules and standards themselves.
Sir James Duncan's presiden-. tial address raised the flag of free enterprise as transport's best hope in traditionally controversial style. To him it was a "perverisity" to create large centralised organisations.
Those who urged a transport authority for Greater London to oversee rail commuter services and London Transport's buses and underground were scourged.
Reading his speech, which commended the break-up of London Transport's bus business into eight separate districts, each with a publicly identifiable general manager, one almos wondered whether he wouli take the argument to its extremi — driver-owned buses.
Perhaps the most significan point made by Sir James in hi presidential message is thi stress he gave to the menace o inflation.
If a haulier can see the cost o his principal assets escalate b■ 200 per cent in five or six year "massive blows lie in store fo businesses which have asset with longer lives than those o the road haulier."
' A haulier achieving a 20 pe ,cent per annum return on capita
and ploughing in all his after-ta) profits will still find his cashflovl insufficient to replace hi: vehicles. "After five years worl he is not richer but poorer."
This reality matches the im portance I have placed on mor€ effective consumer influence ir transport, for it is consumers — the public and customers — whc always pick up the tab. Inflatio•
nary effects are rotting the fabric of government; in transport WE
shall all pay a fearful price foi Alice in Wonderland economics.