ALL FOR ONE, ONE FOR ALL ! t's funny how
Page 8
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
chance conversations in crowd ed rooms set you thinking. Last week, at the same event, two people said different things about the same subject which affect the long-term future of the industry. The first came from Bob McKinnon, former Road Haulage Association chairman: "In my lifetime," he said, "I'm sure we'll see one trade association for the transport industry." He went on to describe a unified organisation with strong groups representing the needs of hauliers and own-account operators (0A0s). We think he's right, on two counts. First, the industry would benefit from the services delivered by one association. And second, because of the numbers. More than ever before the industry needs the strength of numbers. For those RHA members worried about the effect a merger with the FTA would have on their identity, McKinnon is adamant that road hauliers would hold their own and be equal partners within any joint association. We think he's right again. Since 1 988 the ball has been bouncing ever further into the hauliers' half of the court, not least in terms of the number of vehicles they now run compared to 0A0s. They have the power, if only they wish to use it. But without numbers there will be no power. So how does an association, merged or otherwise, get that power? Step forward John Mervyn Pugh, retiring Traffic Commissioner. At the same function last week he declared: "I'd like to think that one day in the future it would be a requirement for an operator seeking a licence to belong to a trade associa tion." Not a bad suggestion. And just think what it would do for the numbers—never mind standards.