Without a Song
Page 78
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
SUFFICIENT time has now elapsed for members of the Road Haulage Association to take a detached view of their 1957 conference, and to consider what lessons they can draw from it. One fact that is plainer than ever before is that the discussion of a series of unrelated items is no longer adequate or. appropriate.
The practice has been for a small national subcommittee to make a selection from resolutions submitted by area committees. During the lean years between 1947 and 1953, this proved a satisfactory arrangement. Most of the great transport themes were beyond the reach of hauliers, limited for the most part to a radius of 25 miles. and deprived almost at one blow of half their leaders. The road-haulage industry under free enterprise operated mainly local services, and local problems loomed large. Hauliers were inclined to cultivate their separate small back gardens, and wait for the wheel of fortune to turn.
Not many of them complained because the resolutions they were called upon to consider at conferences ranged from one subject to another, and from the sublime almost to the ridiculous. Precisely this complaint has been levelled at the programme for the Rothesay function.
There was no disguising that all but three of the 18 resolutions were submitted from only two of the Road Haulage Association's areas. There was more than a suggestion that the sponsors of certain resolutions had been disconcerted to count their chickens after they were hatched. The conclusion was that few areas had put up any proposals at all, and that the national subcommittee had been compelled to accept all corners for lack of alternatives.
The somewhat languid atmosphere in which much of the debate was conducted encourages the further conclusion that hauliers had had enough. of the conference formula that had served them well for many years. The short-distance operators had heard all the arguments too often before. The long-distance operators had problems that could not easily be fitted into the form of a short resolution. •
More Dissatisfaction
There was more than usual dissatisfaction with the results of the business sessions this year. But there have been less distinct grumbles at previous conferences. The R.H.A. may, therefore, now think it worth while to examine new methods and new techniques to meet the altered circumstances and needs of members. The standardized pattern is no longer appropriate. It may be possible to go further, and to say that any pattern, too often repeated, becomes monotonous.
What would have helped this year's conference was a common theme running through all the discussions. There is no compelling necessity for hauliers to debate, year after year, such subjects as roads and purchase tax, unless there is something new to be said. Resolutions deploring too few roads and too much tax have little effect in themselves. The Ministers who have ultimately to receive them pay more attention to a well-reasoned case submitted when the time is ripe than to any number of pin-pricks.
A ready-made theme for Rothesay was provided by the Socialists, who at their own conference in Brighton a fortnight earlier had accepted a report proposing.
e40 almost in parenthesis, renationalization of long-distance road haulage and of steel. Knowing well in advance that this decision was inevitable, the R.H.A. might have jettisoned some of their more platitudinous resolutions, and concentrated on the vindication of free enterprise road haulage.
The subject was not altogether neglected. The first item on the agenda callefl for an attempt to rid transport of politics, and the national chairman, Mr. R. G. Crowther, himself proposed a resolution expressing defiance of the Labour party. There were some interesting comments on the subject, but few attempts to enlarge upon it, or to supply any positive reasons why the Socialists are wrong.
Distinct Issue
There were plenty of hints that, whatever the public may feel about the Socialist policy as a whole, they are not keen on the plan for renationalization. They would not vote for it if it were presented as a distinct issue. Trade. and industry would like things left as they are, and many road-haulage workers, perhaps the majority of them, have no enthusiasm for the official trade-union line.
I am not being particularly original in making these points. They are all taken from Mr. Crowther's opening speech leading up to his resolution. A more lasting impression might have been given by varying the method of putting the message across.
For example, more evidence might have been sought of the views of individual traders and of individual roadhaulage workers. If they could have been brought to Rothesay to testify on their own behalf, so much the better. Failing this, there should have been plenty of time for hauliers to ascertain, and to put forward, what their own customers, and their chambers of commerce and of trade, are thinking. Many operators can also quote, with authority, the opinions of their drivers.
Time might also have been found for a more detailed analysis of Socialist policy. Mr. Crowther suggested that the insistence on renationalization savoured of petty spite or more political window dressing. This is hardly an exaggeration, but it would have helped us to have the views of rank-and-file Labour M.P.s.
Some of them are known to be lukewarm towards renationalization, or even opposed to it. It would perh4s be too much to expect that one of the doubters, such as Sir Hartley Shawcross, would come to a conference of road hauliers and unburden his soul. At least the hauliers in constituencies with Socialist majoritts could have asked their M.P.s some questions in advance, and reported the results at Rothesay.
The chairman's resolution spoke of using every constitutional means to win active support; and it is no secret that the R.H.A. intend to prepare and launch a campaign to prove the Socialists misguided. Some part of the conference could have been devoted to a discussion on the objects of the campaign, and even on the means to be employed. It is not always wise to let the other side know exactly what to expect, but at times a parade of force can bring about in an opponent, not necessarily a complete reversal of opinion, but one of those subtle changes of mind that make it possible to avoid combat without loss of face.