Mr. Marples Stung
Page 29
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
T cc HE plain fact is that, despite the skill and ingenuity of engineers and administrators all over the country, the modernization of the nation's highway system still trails hopelessly behind the demands of traffic." Those words were publicly uttered recently by the Britizh Road Federation in a report on the Government Road Proyramme. The Federation, which makes a successful job of continually bringing such matters to Mr. Marples' notice, also stated that it considered that Government road programme spending must be at least doubled to make ready for the influx of more than 1,000 vehicles a day which are being added to our already congested roads.
A totally unexpected result of this B.R.F. report was that the Ministry of Transport immediately issued a public statement complaining that the Federation had ignored "certain important facts." So stung was Mr. Marp!es, who received a copy of the report in the post, that he caused the official statement to be issued the same day.
This was a very unusual step for any Ministry to take, and a venture which was a very doubtful one to embark upon, because, by doing so, Mr. Marples has called more attention upon the B.R.F. report than it would otherwise have received. Ministers, and Ministries, do not usually engage in public arguments with sectional interests attacking Ministerial policy, other than from the floor of the House of Commons. In choosing to break with tradition, did the mercurial Minister of Transport have a twinge of conscience?
The gist of the Ministry's public reply was neither to deny any part of the B.R.F. contention nor to quarrel with it, but merely to point out that a total of £340m. was to be spent in 1961-62 on public investment in transport. Of this £340m., new roads and major improvements will receive about £120m. The figure of £340m. is nearly a quarter of the total 1961-62 public investment. Further increases in the road programme would have to be considered against similar large sums required for items such as defence, education and pensions.
Treasury Trouble That was the Ministry reply. What it boils down to is a woeful piece of hand-wringing at the hardness of the Treasury. Road operators already know this; they also consider that the Minister would better serve their interests by trying to chip pieces off the Treasury's rock-like defences than by trotting out the old, old excuses for his failure to extract more from the Government's pocket.
In point of fact, Mr. Marples has done quite a lot during his stay at the Ministry. He has particularly tried to concentrate on improvements to existing roads and on freeing urban centres. Operators may not always agree with the way he tries to do this, but all agree that the intention to free the roads is correct, so long as the Minister remembers that urban roads are the arteries of retail distribution as well as of traffic flow.
But by publicly arguing with the B.R.F. contentions, and by not refuting them, Mr. Marples must be presumed publicly to be agreeing with them. It would be interesting to know if, in fact, Mr. Marples really does agree that road construction should be doubled.
Certainly it would be no less than justice if this were done. Road transport is recognized as being the major carrier when compared to the railways. Why, therefore, spend almost 50 per cent. more this year on the ailing railways than on the roads, which, sadly inadequate as they are, already carry more than half the country's goods? Even if the spending were comparative to the amounts carried on each form of transport, road operators would still be paying out in special taxes far more than was spent on their behalf.