AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Spirited Letters on Nationalization

21st December 1945
Page 35
Page 35, 21st December 1945 — Spirited Letters on Nationalization
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?

Attack on the R.H.A. Manifesto, Made by Mr. Maurice Webb, Vice-chairman of the Parlianientary Labour Party, Draws a Powerful and Cogent Rejoinder From Mr. Henry T. Duffield, Chairman of the Road Haulage Association

TWO most interesting letters concerning road trans port, in connection with the Government's announced intention of nationalizing an important section of this, have appeared recently in "The Times" The first is by Maurice Webb, vice-chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party It was prompted by the recent manifesto of the R.H.A., and read as follows:— The Road Haulage Association has issued a manifesto in which it is affirmed that "nationalization of road transport has been proved disastrous wherever it has been tried." The public relations officials of this body must do better than that if they are to earn their keep. They will not destroy the case for the public ownership of this essential service by repetition of this sort of outmoded jargon. In any event, they are quite wrong. There exists in these islands an institution which makes nonsense of their assertion.

In Northern Ireland road haulage is a publicly directed service under the control of the Government. And it is one of the most successful enterprises to be found anywhere within the Commonwealth. Not only does it make a lot of money for the community but it gives cheaper and more efficient service than was available before the Northern Ireland Government decided to set up its own Transport Board. I have myself inspected the undertaking. Its efficiency is remarkable. It provides the most remote hamlets in Northern Ireland with rapid, regular, and inexpensive goods delivery. Industrialists and householders alike benefit from the organization which the Government has built up. The service is so cheap and comprehensive, many shopkeepers have dispensed With their own private delivery organization, finding it more economical to use that provided by the State.

Northern Ireland, of course, is a Conservative stronghold. This public enterprise was set up by, and is still run by, a Conservative Government. It is unlikely, therefore, that judgment on its value will be coloured by any ideological bias. Yet Mr. Andrews, the late Conservative Premier of Northern Ireland, once declared, "We backed a winner when we started this." The Labour Government takes the view that what is good for Ulster cannot be "disastrous" for the rest of the United Kingdom.

Chairman of R.H.A. Replies

A .powerful and well-considered reply to this was made by Mr. Henry T. Duffield, chairman of the Road " Haulage Association. It was as follows:— Mr. Maurice Webb's letter which appears in your issue to-day illustrates how little the Labour Party has investigated the position before embarking so hurriedly upon their policy of nationalization of transport. Mr. Maurice Webb cites the Northern Ireland Transport Board as an example of the success of nationalization and presents a picture which is a complete travesty of the real situation.

If the true facts are to be impartially ascertained, reference should be made to the reports of the Commissioner (His Honour Herbert M. Thompson, .K.C.) appointed by the Northern Ireland Government to hold a public inquiry, and of the committee presided over by Sir William McLintock, also appointed by the Northern Ireland .Government in 1938 to report upon the working of the Road and Railway Transport Act of 1935, and to advise on the steps that could be taken to secure on a sound economic basis an adequate and efficient . transport system A public inquiry would hardly have been necessary if the proceSs of nationalization had been the outstanding success depicted by Mr. Maurice Webb, and a perusal of the reports will furnish an unbiased account of what nationalization really means. The Commissioner reported that "the working of the transport system resulted in heavy losses to both the board and the railways and produced much public dissatisfaction and complaint." The McLintock committee referred to the fact that the deficit on working account for the first three years was no less than £454,000, and expressed the view that these losses would continue. The war, however, with the consequent vast increase in the volume of traffic to some extent saved the situatiofi for the Board, although, even so, the recently published accounts reveal a deficit of £288,563 at September 30, 1945. The fact that the Board could make substantial profits under the abnormal conditions created by the war certainly affords no proof of its potential success in peace-time Again, one of the primary objects of the Act of 1935 was to coordinate road and rail services, but the committee reported that the Board had not achieved this and, indeed, it has mot done so yet A Failure Partly Hidden

The war has served to hide the failure of the Northern Ireland Transport Board, and it would be fallacious to draw any conclusions from the Board's war-time experiences, just as it would be to draw any conclusion from the high war-time earnings of the railways in this country. Northern Ireland is no bigger than Yorkshire, and if the process of nationalization resulted in unrest and dislocation there, how much greater would be the dislocation in so highly an industrialized country as Great Britain. Moreover, the Northern Ireland experiment was conducted in the quietude of 1935, whereas in this country the Government proposes to embark upon a hazardous experiment of much greater magnitude at a time when the paramount need is to rehabilitate trade and industry at home and regain markets abroad.

Two lessons may usefully be drawn from the experience of the Northern Ireland Board. First, change of ownership cannot in itself solve any problem—an economic policy and not a political doctrine is essential to solve practical problems. Secondly, it is wiser to have a public inquiry before the event instead of after an irrevocable step has been taken. This Association repeats its challenge to the Government to face the facts of the situation by holding a public inquiry now, and in the meantime reaffirms its statement, which Mr. Maurice Webb has vainly sought to disprove, "that nationalization of road transport has proved disastrous wherever it has been tried."


comments powered by Disqus