AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

"A Plague on Both Your Houses" —R.H.A. Chairman to Parties

22nd May 1959, Page 35
22nd May 1959
Page 35
Page 35, 22nd May 1959 — "A Plague on Both Your Houses" —R.H.A. Chairman to Parties
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?

nuR dearest wish would be to stop, playing the role of a political storm centre, and sometimes one is tempted to say to all parties alike. a plague on both your Houses,' said Mr. R. N. Ingram, national chairman of the Road Haulage Association, at the Association's annual dinner in London on Wednesday. "But our opposition to the Labour policy on

transport should not be construed as indicating our complete satisfaction ,

with the policy of the Conservatives," he said. Such an assumption would be very wide of the mark.

There was one basic principle on which the legitimate aspirations of the industry had not been recognized even by the Conservatives. From the early days of road transport when its rapid growth clearly indicated that it was to become an important factor in the transport system and a serious threat to the railways' monopoly, the industry had suffered the combined effects of restrictive legislation and special taxation at a most penal level, said Mr. Ingram.

• The road haulage industry's main claim upon a Conservative Government would be to adjust the position so that real equality of competition between the two forms of transport could be established.

"We still regard ourselves as pioneers in the road haulage industry," added Mr. Ingram, "and the expansive policy of the Government has naturally found an echo among the whole of our membership." Hauliers under free enterprise were proud that they had consistently found the answer to every transport problem arising from the development of trade and manufacture.

On the more spectacular side members had been called upon to handle giant loads, and there seemed no limit to the size of the indivisible Consignments that heavy haulage groups tackled.

"If we have a complaint,'". continued Mr, Ingram, "it is perhaps that the Government persist in keeping us tiedto a somewhat too rigid licensing systeM.' Ever since the system was instituted. in 1933 we have accepted it, and to some extent acknowledged the necessity."

There was a growing trend, however, which the railways had not been slow in aiding and abetting, to' tie the haulier much too rigidly to carrying the same traffic year after year. In the natural process of time he was bound to find that some of his traffics diminished in importance. He should have a reasonable opportunity to replace this sort of wastage.

Over the past 10 years the number of vehicles operated by hauliers had increased by no more than about 30 per cent., and, although it was true that the average carrying capacity of vehicles had increased and that new techniques had made it possible for hauliers to carry more traffic in the same vehicle, the overall increase had not kept pace with the rise in industrial production.

On the other hand, in the same 10 years, the number of C-licensed vehicles had more than doubled. The major part of this increase took place during the dark ages of nationalization, when the continued freedom of the trader to run his own vehicles was the salvation of trade and industry.

"Are the hauliers failing the nation?" asked Mr. Ingram. "I can hardly believe this is so," he said, "when I find from some recent figures we have collated from long-distance hauliers that it is normal for a vehicle with a capacity of II tons to travel over 40,000 -miles in the course of a year.

"In so doing they carry 225,000 tons of goods over an average ,distance of 140 miles. These figures prove that in the hands of free-enterprise hauliers a goods vehicle becomes a highly efficient -Machine.

HAULIER FINED FOR EXCESSIVE HOURS .

FOR failing to cause two of his drivers to keep records, Alfred Jesse Thomas, haulier, Coalpit Heath, was fined £40 at Chipping Sodhury last week.

His son, Raymond Alfred Thomas, and John Edwin Woddington, were the drivers, Raymond Thomas admitted that he failed to keep a record and that he drove for more than 51 hours continuously and was fined £20. Woddington pleaded guilty to failing to keep records and was fined £3. Alfred Thomas was ordered to pay' £6 6s. advocates fee and £3 Os. 6d. costs, Mr. A. F. P. Holloway, prosecuting, said the offences were committed on December 10, 1958, when the younger Thomas was seen by a traffic examiner at Crediton. He had been driving from midnight to 7 a.m. The authorities were told that Woddington had gone to Crediton to drive the lorry back to Coalpit Heath, added Mr. Holloway,

LIFTS TO FACTORIES ABSTRACT BUS TRAFFIC

APROBLEM has been set the Ulster Transport Authority by the, number of men who work at the Maydown industrial estate, Londonderry, and give lifts to their workmates to and from the factories in their cars and on motorcycles. • A number of buses is superfluous whilst 1,500 workers have their own means for travel.

It is suspected that the passengers contribute towards the car owners' running costs, but little can be done to eliminate any illegal circumstances without evidence of payment.

Mr. James Houston, Londonderry traffic manager of the U.TA., has stated that buses are carrying only 18 per cent. of the potential traffic to Maydown.


comments powered by Disqus